Wakilii

Sikubwabo Kyeyune v Twairi Ssebaggala (Miscellaneous Application 225 of 2023)

High Court · [2026] UGHCCD 78 · 2026 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution pending appeal to the Court of Appeal from High Court judgment in HCCS No. 201 of 2017
Decision
Stay of execution granted conditionally upon provision of security within 30 days

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

Held that the applicant satisfied the conditions for a stay of execution pending appeal. The court found that an appeal had been lodged without unreasonable delay, that enforcement of the decree would cause substantial loss and render the appeal nugatory, and that the grounds of appeal raised serious and arguable questions. The stay was granted conditionally upon the applicant depositing security equivalent to 30% of the decreed amount or a properly valued and unencumbered title within 30 days.

Outcome

Stay of execution granted conditionally upon provision of security within 30 days

Facts

The applicant was the defendant in HCCS No. 201 of 2017, in which judgment was entered against him for UGX 118,773,200. The applicant filed a notice of appeal and memorandum of appeal to the Court of Appeal. The respondent, as judgment creditor, initiated execution proceedings under EMA No. 0023 of 2023. The applicant then brought this application for a stay of execution pending the appeal. The applicant offered security in the form of a land title for property in Busiro Block 465, Plot 1686, Namangulu, valued at over UGX 200,000,000, pledged by his advocate Bemanyisa Adonijah. The respondent opposed the application, arguing that the security was inadequate because no search or valuation report was attached, ownership rights were disputed, and the property was not owned by the applicant himself.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant fulfills the conditions for the grant of a stay of execution pending the appeal.

Orders

  • The applicant shall deposit the title levied as security in court with a proper search and valuation report to ensure that the same is worth 30% of the amount due and is free from encumbrances or, a deposit of an amount equivalent to 30% of the amount due.
  • The same shall be done within 30 days from the date hereof.
  • Upon fulfilment of the above, an order of stay of execution of HCCS No. 201 of 2017 shall issue pending the hearing and determination of the appeal in the Court of Appeal.
  • Costs shall abide the appeal.

Rules and key headnotes

Stay of Execution — Conditions for Grant — Pending Appeal
A court may grant a stay of execution pending appeal where the applicant demonstrates that an appeal has been lodged and is pending, the appeal is not frivolous and discloses a likelihood of success, there is a serious and imminent threat of execution such that the appeal would be rendered nugatory if not stayed, the application has been made without unreasonable delay, the applicant is prepared to provide security for due performance of the decree, and refusal to grant a stay would inflict greater hardship than it would avoid.
Stay of Execution — Substantial Loss — Meaning and Application
Substantial loss does not represent any particular amount or size but refers to any loss of real worth or value as distinguished from a loss that is merely nominal. Enforcement of a decree before determination of an appeal may constitute substantial loss where it would irreparably prejudice the applicant and render the appeal nugatory.
Stay of Execution — Security for Due Performance — Court's Discretion
The court has discretion to grant a stay of execution without requiring security, but where security is offered, the court may require that it be properly valued, free from encumbrances, and sufficient to cover a reasonable proportion of the decreed amount.
Stay of Execution — Likelihood of Success — Test for Frivolousness
An appeal has a likelihood of success for purposes of a stay application where it is not frivolous and raises serious questions to be tried. The court need not determine the merits of the appeal but must be satisfied that the grounds raise arguable issues.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (7)

  • Singh v Runda Coffee Estates Ltd (1966 EA)
  • Lawrence Musiitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye (SC Civil Application No. 18 of 1990)
  • Kyambogo University v Prof. Isaiah Omolo Ndiege (Civil Application No. 341 of 2013)
  • Hon. Theodore Ssekikubo & Others v Attorney General & Others (Constitutional Application No. 03 of 2014)
  • Tropical Commodities Supplies Ltd v International Credit Bank Ltd (In Liquidation) (2004) 2 EA 331
  • Adam Kirumira v Kamala Lalani (CACA No. 270 of 2023)
  • Gapco Uganda Ltd v Kaweesa & Anor (MA No. 259 of 2013)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Sikubwabo Kyeyune v Twairi Ssebaggala (Miscellaneous Application 225 of 2023) [2026] UGHCCD 78 (3 March 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.