Semakula Stephen v Kibuuka Herbert (Civil Application 581 of 2026)
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 applicant sought a stay of execution pending his appeal against the dismissal of a High Court revision application. Sitting as a single Judge, the Court of Appeal held that the right of appeal is purely a creature of statute and that no appeal lies from a High Court revision decision, since Section 83 of the Civil Procedure Act does not provide for one and such a decision is final. The proposed appeal was therefore incompetent for want of jurisdiction, so the applicant could not establish a prima facie case with a likelihood of success — the first condition for a stay. The application was accordingly dismissed.
Outcome
Application for stay of execution dismissed.
Facts
The underlying dispute originated in Civil Suit No. 10 of 2003/2006, handled by the Magistrate Grade One Court at Mengo (Nateete), later referred to as Mwanga II Court, Kampala. Dissatisfied with the judgment and decree, the applicant sought revision in High Court Civil Revision No. 2015 of 2015. On 31 March 2021, Lady Justice Olive Kazaarwe Mukwaya dismissed the revision, finding inordinate and unexplained delay and apparent concealment of earlier proceedings. The applicant then lodged Civil Appeal No. 362 of 2021 in the Court of Appeal. After the appeal was lodged, the respondent commenced execution, relying on a Notice of Eviction/Vacant Possession requiring the applicant to vacate the suit property. An earlier stay application in the High Court (Miscellaneous Application No. 2269 of 2021) had been dismissed. The applicant then moved the Court of Appeal for a stay of execution pending the hearing of his appeal.
Issues
- Whether the applicant satisfied the conditions for a stay of execution pending appeal.
- Whether an appeal lies to the Court of Appeal from a decision of the High Court dismissing an application for revision, such that the applicant could show a prima facie case with a likelihood of success.
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- Both counsel for the Applicant and the Respondent penalised in costs for non-appearance, such costs to be paid to the Applicant.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (10)
- Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I. 13-10 r.2(2)
- Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I. 13-10 r.6(2)
- Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I. 13-10 r.6(2)(b)
- Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I. 13-10 r.42(2)
- Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I. 13-10 r.43(1)
- Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I. 13-10 r.44(1)
- Judicature Act s.12(1)
- Judicature Act Cap. 16 s.10
- Constitution of Uganda art.134(2)
- Civil Procedure Act s.83
Cases cited (3)
- Hon. Theodore Ssekikubo and Others v Attorney General and Another (Constitutional Application No. 6 of 2013)
- Eseza Bgakika v National Social Security Fund [2025] UGSC 77
- Faustlne M,o,mbara a Benon Sebufisho, SCCzI .I\Io. Oa of 2027
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.