Wakilii

Rutaro Robert v Makerere University and Another (Miscellaneous Application 114 of 2025)

High Court · [2026] UGHCCD 267 · 2026 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution of a judgment and decree pending determination of an appeal to the Court of Appeal
Decision
Application for stay of execution dismissed; issue answered in the negative

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 Court dismissed an application to stay execution of a costs decree pending appeal. While the Applicant showed a pending, non-frivolous appeal and the application was not rendered moot by completion of taxation nor defeated by delay alone, he failed to establish the other discretionary requirements. He led no evidence of substantial loss from paying the taxed costs of UGX 10,633,000, did not show the appeal would be rendered nugatory, showed no commenced execution or demand (the respondent swore it did not intend to execute), and neither furnished nor offered security. Weighed cumulatively, the balance did not justify withholding a valid decree, and the application failed.

Outcome

Application for stay of execution dismissed; issue answered in the negative

Facts

The Applicant had brought High Court Miscellaneous Cause No. 023 of 2023 seeking judicial review of the Makerere University Convocation Annual General Meeting held on 30 December 2022. On 15 May 2024 the High Court (Wamala J.) dismissed that application with costs to the Respondents. The Applicant lodged a Notice of Appeal on 17 May 2024 and instituted Civil Appeal No. 0448 of 2024 in the Court of Appeal, which remained pending, and had written to the Registrar seeking a hearing date. Following judgment, the 1st Respondent filed a bill of costs, initially drawn at UGX 18,333,000, which was taxed and allowed at UGX 10,633,000 on 19 May 2025. The Applicant, apprehending recovery of the taxed costs, applied to stay execution of the judgment and decree pending the appeal. The 1st Respondent swore that, notwithstanding taxation, it had not applied for execution, made no demand for payment, taken no recovery steps, and had no near-term intention to execute.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicant satisfied the legal requirements for the grant of an order staying execution of the judgment and decree in High Court Miscellaneous Cause No. 023 of 2023 pending determination of Civil Appeal No. 0448 of 2024.

Orders

  • The application fails.
  • Costs shall be in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution Pending Appeal — Nature and Object of the Discretion
The jurisdiction to grant a stay of execution pending appeal is discretionary and must be exercised judicially; its object is not to deprive the successful litigant of the fruits of judgment but to preserve the efficacy of the appellate process so that a successful appeal is not rendered nugatory.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Substantial Loss Must Be Proved by Evidence
An applicant must establish by evidence, not mere assertion, that refusal of a stay would occasion substantial loss such that the success of the appeal would be rendered hollow; payment of a quantified costs award, without evidence of irreversibility or the respondent's inability to refund, does not amount to substantial loss.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Threat of Execution — Taxation Distinct from Execution
An applicant need not await coercive execution before seeking a stay, but the apprehended execution must be real rather than speculative; completion of taxation ascertains the amount recoverable and is not conclusive proof of imminent execution, and uncontroverted sworn evidence that no execution is intended may negate a demonstrated threat.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Security for Due Performance of the Decree
An applicant seeking to postpone enforcement of a valid decree is expected to furnish or offer security for due performance; while absence of prior security need not automatically defeat the application because the court may prescribe terms, the omission assumes greater significance where substantial loss has not been demonstrated.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Prospects of Appeal and Delay
At the interlocutory stage the court inquires only whether the appeal is arguable and not plainly frivolous, without rehearsing the appeal; and the existence of a pending, non-frivolous appeal does not by itself entitle the applicant to a stay, nor is the application necessarily defeated by delay where enforcement steps arose only later.

Legislation cited (2)

Cases cited (3)

  • Hon. Theodore Ssekikubo and Others v Attorney General and Others (Constitutional Application No. 6 of 2013)
  • Tumusiime Lawrence v Amutuheire Francis (Miscellaneous Application No. 263 of 2023)
  • SBI International Holdings AG (U) Ltd v COVEC International Co. Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 183 of 2018)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Rutaro Robert v Makerere University and Another (Miscellaneous Application 114 of 2025) [2026] UGHCCD 267 (10 August 2026)
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.