Outreach to Africa Ltd v Manigamukama (Civil Applicaton No.304 of 2015)

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.

Holding

The Court of Appeal granted a stay of execution pending a second appeal. Although applications of this nature should ordinarily be lodged in the High Court first under rule 42, the Court exercised its discretion to entertain it in the circumstances. The Court found the intended appeal raised substantial questions of fact and law and was not frivolous, that the applicant would suffer irreparable harm given the likelihood of attachment of the school land following extraction of the decree and taxation of costs, and that the application had been lodged without undue delay. The stay was granted on condition that the applicant deposit UGX 44,000,000 with the Registrar within one month.

Outcome

Stay of execution granted pending appeal, conditional on deposit of UGX 44,000,000 with the Registrar within one month

Facts

The applicant company purchased land from the respondent for UGX 74,000,000 and paid an installment of UGX 30,000,000. The balance of UGX 44,000,000 was payable on completion of transfer of the titled land. The applicant declined to pay the balance, contending the land did not measure the alleged 15 acres. The respondent sued for the balance. The trial court found for the applicant, holding UGX 74,000,000 excessive for land measuring only 6.908 acres. On appeal, the High Court reversed, holding the respondent entitled to the balance because acreage was not a term of the agreement. The applicant appealed to the Court of Appeal and applied for a stay of execution, contending the respondent had extracted the decree and taxed the bill of costs, raising the threat of execution against the school land.

Issues

1. Whether the Court of Appeal should entertain the application for stay of execution despite it not having been lodged in the High Court first.
2. Whether the applicant satisfied the conditions for the grant of a stay of execution pending appeal.

Orders

• Application allowed on conditions.
• The applicant shall deposit UGX 44,000,000/= (the balance on the purchase price) with the Registrar of the Court by Bank Draft within one month from the date of the order.
• Failure to comply with the deposit condition results in automatic lapse of the order of stay.
• Costs of this application shall be in the main cause.
• The Registrar is directed to fix the appeal at the nearest convenience of Court.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (7)

• Judicature Act Cap 13 s.10
• Judicature Act Cap 13 s.12
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions SI 13-10 r.2
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions SI 13-10 r.6(b)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions SI 13-10 r.42
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions SI 13-10 r.43
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions SI 13-10 r.44

Cases cited (7)

• Gashumba Maniraguha v Sam Nkundiye (Civil Application No. 24 of 2015)
• Nganga v Kimani [1969] EA 67
• Flora Rwamarungu v DFCU Leasing Co Ltd (Civil Application No. 11 of 2009)
• Lawrence Musiitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye (Civil Application No. 18 of 1990)
• Aids Health Foundation v Stephen Mirembe Kizito (Civil Application No. 146 of 2014)
• Theodore Ssekikubo v Attorney General (Constitutional Application No. 6 of 2013)
• Akankwasa Damian v Uganda (Constitutional Application No. 7 and 9 of 2011)

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