Tekereza & 2 Others v Kyaligonza & 2 Others (Civil Application 1114 of 2023)

Observed later treatment

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

On an application for a stay of execution pending appeal, the single Justice restated the established conditions: a likelihood of success or prima facie right of appeal, irreparable damage or that the appeal would be rendered nugatory, and, failing those, the balance of convenience, the application having been made without delay. The Court held the application was rightly before it because the applicants' High Court stay application had not been fixed for hearing, amounting to substantial delay. On the merits, the applicants had raised arguable points to be argued on appeal, would suffer irreparable damage through threatened arrest and eviction, and the balance of convenience favoured them. The application was allowed and the status quo preserved.

Outcome

Application for stay of execution granted pending the hearing of the appeal; status quo as at the ruling in Miscellaneous Application No. 24 of 2023 preserved

Facts

The applicants, as administrators of the late Birigenda Kaija Benjamin, were the successful plaintiffs in High Court Civil Suit No. 015 of 2019, in which the trial Judge declared the suit land part of the estate, granted a permanent injunction, cancelled the respondents' title, and ordered eviction. The respondents appealed and obtained a conditional stay of execution in Misc. Application No. 166 of 2022 on deposit of 25% of the decretal sum of UGX 420,000,000. The respondents then obtained a contempt order in Misc. Application No. 24 of 2023 directing the applicants' arrest and that they vacate the land. A warrant of arrest issued and the applicants faced threatened arrest and eviction. The applicants appealed that order and applied to the Court of Appeal for a stay of execution, their High Court stay application having not been fixed for hearing.

Issues

1. Whether the application for stay of execution was properly before the Court of Appeal given the concurrent jurisdiction of the High Court.
2. Whether the applicants adduced sufficient reasons to justify the grant of a stay of execution pending appeal.

Orders

• The Order of Stay of Execution of the Ruling and Orders in Miscellaneous Application No. 024 of 2023 delivered by Hon. Justice Isa Serunkuma at Masindi on 13th October 2023 is stayed pending the hearing of the appeal.
• Status quo be maintained as at the time of the ruling in Miscellaneous Application No. 24 of 2023.
• Costs shall abide the outcome of the appeal.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (6)

• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules r.2(2)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules r.6(2)(b)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules r.42
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules r.43(1)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules r.44(1)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal) Rules r.76

Cases cited (7)

• Theodore Ssekikubo and Others v Attorney General and Another (Constitutional Application No. 6 of 2013)
• P. K. Sengendo v Busulwa & Male Abdul [2014] 1 HCB 107
• Lawrence Musiitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 18 of 1990)
• Kyambogo University v Prof. Isaiah Omolo Ndiege (Civil Application No. 341 of 2013)
• Stanley Kang'ethe Kinyanjui v Tony Ketter & 5 Others [2013] eKLR
• Giella v Cassman Brown & Co. [1973] E.A 358
• Jayndrakumar Devechand Devani v Haridas Vallabhdas Bhadresa & Anor (Civil Appeal No. 21 of 1971)

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

• Simon Peter Ongodia v Apuda Ignatius Loyola (Civil Application No. 490 of 2024)

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