Wakilii

Omer Ismail Adam v Aman Ahmed Hagos (Miscellaneous Application No. 2142 of 2025)

High Court · [2025] UGCOMMC 400 · 2025 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to appeal from dismissal of application to set aside dismissal of earlier application, and for stay of execution pending appeal
Decision
Leave to appeal granted; execution stayed conditionally pending appeal

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 granted leave to appeal from an order dismissing an application to set aside a dismissal for want of prosecution under Order 17 rule 4. While the court could not conclusively state that the intended appeal had reasonable prospects of success, it held that the interests of justice and advancement of jurisprudence would be best served by referring the matter to a higher court. The court also granted a stay of execution conditional upon the applicant depositing 30% of the decretal sum within 30 days.

Outcome

Leave to appeal granted; execution stayed conditionally pending appeal

Facts

The applicant was defendant in Civil Suit No. 1550 of 2023 in which default judgment was entered against him on 24 July 2024 for USD 29,500 with interest and costs. On 26 November 2024, he filed Miscellaneous Application No. 2556 of 2024 to set aside the default judgment. When that application came up for hearing on 23 June 2025, neither party appeared and the court dismissed it for want of prosecution under Order 17 rule 4. The applicant then filed Miscellaneous Application No. 1756 of 2025 to set aside the dismissal and reinstate the earlier application. On 14 September 2025, the court dismissed that application, holding that an order under Order 17 rule 4 attains finality and the only recourse is appeal, and further finding that the applicant had shown a pattern of lack of diligence. The respondent commenced execution proceedings. The applicant then filed the present application seeking leave to appeal the 14 September 2025 ruling and stay of execution pending appeal.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicant has sufficient grounds to be granted leave to appeal?
  2. Whether the application satisfies the requirements for grant of an order for stay of execution?

Orders

  • The applicant is granted leave to lodge an appeal from the orders of this Honorable Court issued in Miscellaneous Application No. 1756 of 2025 dated 14th September, 2025.
  • Execution of Miscellaneous Application No. 462 of 2024 is stayed until determination of the appeal subject to the applicant depositing, in court, 30% of the decretal amount (USD 29,500) for the duration of the appeal, within 30 days of this order failing which the order of stay shall lapse automatically.
  • The costs of this application are to abide the result of the appeal.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Leave to Appeal — Test for Grant — Reasonable Prospect of Success
Leave to appeal will normally be granted where prima facie there exist grounds which merit serious judicial investigation. An applicant seeking leave must demonstrate that the intended appeal has a reasonable prospect of success or that arguable grounds exist, provided the applicant has not engaged in dilatory conduct. A real prospect of success means that the prospect must be realistic rather than fanciful. Leave will be refused only if the appeal is devoid of realistic prospects of success.
Civil Procedure — Leave to Appeal — Interests of Justice and Advancement of Jurisprudence
Even where a court cannot conclusively state that an intended appeal presents a reasonable prospect of success or that arguable grounds exist, the court may grant leave to appeal if it is of the opinion that the interests of justice and the advancement of jurisprudence would be best served by referring the matter to a higher court.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Sufficient Cause — Pending Appeal
Where leave to appeal has been granted, this constitutes sufficient cause for the grant of a stay of execution pending determination of the appeal. The court may impose conditions on the stay, including requiring the applicant to deposit a percentage of the decretal sum in court.

Legislation cited (13)

Cases cited (5)

  • Shah v Attorney General (1971) EA 50
  • G.M. Combined (U) Ltd v A.K. Detergents (U) Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 23 of 1994)
  • Kayaga v Waligo (Court of Appeal Miscellaneous Application No. 80 of 2012)
  • G.M. Combined v A.K. Detergents (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 23 of 1994)
  • Swain v Hillman [2001] 1 All ER 91

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Omer Ismail Adam v Aman Ahmed Hagos (Miscellaneous Application No. 2142 of 2025) [2025] UGCommC 400 (31 October 2025)
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.