Wakilii

Nyakabwa and Another v Kalimbi Kairumba and 2 Others (HCT-01-CV-MA 27 of 2024)

High Court · [2024] UGHC 745 · 2024 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for interim stay of execution arising from Misc. Application No. 26 of 2024, originating from Civil Suit No. 0014 of 2016
Decision
Application for interim stay of execution dismissed

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

Held that an interim stay of execution requires a competent notice of appeal, a substantive application, and a serious threat of execution. While the applicants satisfied the first two requirements by filing a notice of appeal and an application for validation, they failed to demonstrate an imminent threat of execution. Allegations that respondents put land on sale lacked supporting evidence, and a taxed bill of costs alone does not constitute imminent threat.

Outcome

Application for interim stay of execution dismissed

Facts

Applicants, administrators of an estate, filed Civil Suit No. 14 of 2016 seeking to recover 30 acres of land. Judgment was delivered in favour of respondents in their absence. Upon learning of the judgment when the 2nd respondent claimed victory and allegedly put the land on market for sale, applicants filed a notice of appeal (out of time) and sought leave to appeal. They filed Misc. Application No. 26 of 2024 for stay of execution and Misc. Application No. 27 of 2024 for interim stay of execution, alleging imminent threat that respondents would sell the land. Respondents denied any attempt to execute or sell the land, stating no execution proceedings had commenced. A bill of costs had been taxed but no application for execution filed.

Issues

  1. Whether this is a proper case for grant of an interim stay of execution.
  2. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Interim Orders — Requirements
For an application for interim stay of execution to succeed, the applicant must satisfy three conditions: (a) a competent notice of appeal, (b) a substantive application for stay, and (c) a serious threat of execution before the hearing of the substantive application.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Imminent Threat — Standard of Proof
An imminent threat of execution must be visible, immediate, and about to take place. The threat should not be speculative or fanciful, and the applicant must lead evidence demonstrating that execution is about to occur and that failure to grant the interim order will result in detriment to the applicant.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Taxed Bill of Costs — Imminent Threat
The mere fact that a bill of costs has been taxed does not in itself pose an imminent threat of execution warranting grant of an interim order of stay, especially where the decree holder has not made an application to execute the decree.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (6)

  • Zubeda Mohamed and Another v Laila Wallia and Another (Civil Reference No. 07 of 2016)
  • Hwang Sung Industries Limited v Tajdin Hussein and Others (SC Civil Application No. 19 of 2008)
  • Theodore Ssekikuubo and Others v Attorney General and Others (SC Constitutional Application No. 04 of 2014)
  • Yakobo Senkungu and Others v Cerencio Mukasa (SC Civil Application No. 5 of 2013)
  • Guliano Gargiov Calaudio Casadio
  • Patrick Kaumba Wiltshire v Ismail Dabule (Supreme Court Civil Appeal, 27 March 2018)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Nyakabwa and Another v Kalimbi Kairumba and 2 Others (HCT-01-CV-MA 27 of 2024) [2024] UGHC 745 (3 May 2024)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.