Sheikh Hussien Ssengendo v Hajat Nambi Lugwisa (Miscellaneous Application No. 1386 of 2025)
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 a temporary stay of execution of a decree pending appeal to the Court of Appeal, upon the applicant paying security of UGX 10,000,000 for due performance of the decree. The court applied the five conditions from Lawrence Musitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye and found that the applicant satisfied all requirements: he had lodged a notice of appeal, there was imminent threat of execution that would render the appeal nugatory, he would suffer substantial loss through eviction from his matrimonial home, the application was made without unreasonable delay, and security for due performance was ordered to protect the respondent's interests.
Outcome
Stay of execution granted upon payment of security of UGX 10,000,000 pending determination of appeal in the Court of Appeal
Facts
The applicant was sued by the respondent in the Chief Magistrate's Court at Makindye in Civil Suit No. 29 of 2018. The trial court declared the applicant a trespasser, issued an eviction order, awarded general damages of UGX 7,000,000 with 10% interest, and awarded costs to the respondent. The applicant appealed to the High Court in Civil Appeal No. 188 of 2023, which dismissed the appeal and upheld the lower court's decision on 2 December 2024. The applicant then filed a second appeal to the Court of Appeal (Civil Appeal No. 1057 of 2024) on 9 December 2024. The respondent commenced execution proceedings by filing a bill of costs for taxation, with a hearing scheduled for 26 June 2025. The applicant resides on the suit kibanja with his family in his matrimonial home. The respondent has never been in occupation of the suit land.
Issues
- Whether the application merits the grant of an order for stay of execution pending the determination of the appeal?
- What remedies are available to the parties?
Orders
- The execution of the decree from Civil Appeal No. 188 of 2023 against the applicant be stayed pending the determination of the applicant's appeal vide Civil Appeal No. 144 of 2024 upon payment of UGX 10,000,000 (Ten Million Ugandan Shillings) for due performance of the decree.
- The costs of the application will abide the outcome of the appeal in the Court of Appeal.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (11)
- Judicature Act s.37
- Civil Procedure Act Cap 282 s.98
- Civil Procedure Act Cap 282 s.64(c)
- Civil Procedure Act Cap 282 s.64(e)
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 41 rule 2(3)
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 41 rule 2(4)
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 41 rule 7
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 41 rule 9
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 52 rule 1
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 52 rule 3
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 43 rule 4(3)
Cases cited (8)
- Wilson v Church (1879) 12 Ch D 454
- Singh v Runda Coffee Estates Limited (1966) EA
- Lawrence Musitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 18 of 1990)
- Theodore Sekikubo and Others v The Attorney General and Others (Constitutional Application No. 03 of 2014)
- Kyambogo University v Prof Isaiah Omolo Ndiege (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 341 of 2013)
- Samwiri Massa v Rose Achen (1978) HCB 297
- Tropical Commodities Supplies Limited & 2 Others v International Credit Bank Limited (in liquidation) (2004) EA
- John Baptist Kawanga v Namyalo Kevina & Another (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 12 of 2017)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.