Wakilii

Oloit v Abubakar and Another (Miscellaneous Application 145 of 2022)

High Court · [2023] UGHCCD 212 · 2023 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution of decree pending appeal to Court of Appeal
Decision
Application dismissed with costs to the respondents

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

The High Court dismissed an application for stay of execution pending appeal. The applicant failed to satisfy the required grounds: he did not prove substantial loss, did not demonstrate serious or imminent threat of execution, filed the application after unreasonable delay of over four months, and failed to attach a memorandum of appeal to show likelihood of success. The court held that filing a notice of appeal alone is insufficient for stay of execution.

Outcome

Application dismissed with costs to the respondents

Facts

The applicant sought to stay execution of a decree arising from Civil Appeal No. 33 of 2017 and Civil Suit No. 48 of 2008 pending his appeal to the Court of Appeal. The decree had restrained the applicant from using suit land and ordered him to pay costs. The respondents filed bills of costs for taxation. The applicant filed a notice of appeal on 8 June 2022 and received certified proceedings on 12 October 2022. He filed the stay application on 14 October 2022, approximately four months and fourteen days after the judgment dismissing his appeal was entered on 31 May 2022. The respondents did not file a reply to the application.

Issues

  1. Whether this application discloses grounds for the grant of an order for a stay of execution?
  2. What remedies can be availed to the parties in the circumstances?

Orders

  • Application for stay of execution dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Grounds for Grant — Notice of Appeal
A notice of appeal is a sufficient expression of an intention to file an appeal and such action is sufficient to found the basis for grant of orders of stay in appropriate cases.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Substantial Loss — Burden of Proof
An applicant for stay of execution must provide documentary proof demonstrating occupation of suit land or derivation of sustenance from it. Mere assertion without evidence is insufficient to establish substantial loss.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Imminent Threat of Execution
Mere filing of a bill of costs is not sufficient to prove imminent danger of execution. For a stay of execution to be granted, there should be a serious threat of execution such as a Notice to Show Cause why execution should issue.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Delay — Reasonable Time
An application for stay of execution filed over four months after judgment is made with unreasonable delay. An intended appellant who has filed a notice of appeal should apply for stay of execution as soon as possible and not wait until lodging the appeal.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Likelihood of Success — Memorandum of Appeal
In the absence of a memorandum of appeal, the court cannot evaluate the merits and likelihood of success of an applicant's appeal. There must be material upon which the court can determine whether there is an appeal and whether it has any likelihood of success.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Security for Costs — Discretion of Court
The depositing of security for costs is not a condition precedent to the grant of stay of execution. However, whether an applicant should deposit security is an exercise of discretion by the court which can only be exercised upon viewing the circumstances of each particular case.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — General Principle
An intention to appeal per se is not a ground for stay of execution and instituting an appeal does not operate as a stay of execution. A party seeking stay must satisfy the court that there is sufficient cause why the party with judgment should postpone enjoyment of its benefits.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (14)

  • Lawrence Musiitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 18 of 1990)
  • Hon Theodore Ssekikubo and Others v The Attorney General and Others (Constitutional Application No. 3 of 2014)
  • Kyambogo University v Prof Isaiah Omolo Ndiege (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 341 of 2013)
  • Attorney General of Uganda v East African Law Society and Another (EACJ Application No. 1 of 2013)
  • Equity Bank (U) Ltd v Nicholas Were (Miscellaneous Application No. 604 of 2013)
  • Eriab Kabigiza v Lawrence Sserwanja [1975] HCB 199
  • Tropical Commodities Supplies Ltd and Others v International Credit Bank Ltd (in liquidation) [2004] 2 EA 331
  • Membe v Mayoga [2009] 1 HCB 82
  • Hwang Sung Industries Ltd v Tadjin Hussein [2008] ULR 310
  • Ujagar Singh v Runda Coffee Estates Ltd [1966] EA 263
  • Baguma Paul T/A Panache Associates v Engineer Karuma Kagyina (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 460 of 2020)
  • Kawalya v Namyalo (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 12 of 2017)
  • Imperial Royale Hotel Ltd and 2 Others v Ochan Daniel (Miscellaneous Application No. 111 of 2012)
  • Wilson Mukiibi v James Semusambwa (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 9 of 2003)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Oloit v Abubakar and Another (Miscellaneous Application 145 of 2022) [2023] UGHCCD 212 (7 July 2023)
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.