Uganda Peoples Congress and Another v Joseph Bbosa and Others (Civil Misc. Appln. No. 26 of 2016)

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.

Holding

The Court of Appeal held that, exercising its inherent power under section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act and Rule 2(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules backed by Article 126(2)(e), it could make orders necessary for the ends of justice. Applying Hwan Sung Industries Ltd v Tajdin Hussein, the Court reaffirmed that an interim order of stay may be granted where a substantive application is pending and there is a serious threat of execution before its hearing. Finding both a pending appeal and main application, and a real threat of execution (including a frozen party bank account and a convened extraordinary party council), the Court granted the interim stay to preserve the status quo and prevent the main application from being rendered nugatory.

Outcome

Interim order of stay of execution granted pending determination of the main application for stay of execution

Facts

On 1 June 2015 the UPC Electoral Commission declared Hon. James Michael Akena President-elect of the Uganda Peoples Congress (UPC). The respondents challenged this in High Court Misc. Cause No. 0086 of 2015. The trial Judge (Yasin Nyanzi, J) allowed the application in part, quashing by certiorari the Electoral Commission's decision, declaring Akena's election null and void for violating the UPC Constitution, and declaring his subsequent election by the Delegates Conference illegal, though declining to award costs or order fresh elections. The applicants filed a Notice of Appeal and a main application for stay of execution in the Court of Appeal, then sought an interim stay. They contended their party's activities and bank accounts (at Orient Bank and Barclays) were being paralysed. Reports indicated the 1st Applicant's Orient Bank account may have been frozen from about 15 January 2016, and a faction had convened an extraordinary National Council. The respondents argued the orders were mere declarations, not executable, and there was no imminent threat of execution.

Issues

1. Whether the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to entertain the application, particularly in respect of the frozen bank account.
2. Whether the applicants satisfied the requirements for the grant of an interim order of stay of execution.

Orders

• An interim order of stay is granted staying the execution and/or implementation of all orders of the High Court in High Court Miscellaneous Cause No. 00086/2015, restraining the respondents, their agents/servants or persons claiming under them, and any authorities or public bodies from acting on or enforcing the said orders, and from interfering with the activities and exercise of authority of the 1st Applicant and its leadership under Hon. James Michael Akena and his Cabinet, including directions for operating bank accounts and defreezing the 1st Applicant's Orient Bank account, until final determination of the main application (Misc. Application No. 19 of 2016) or further orders.
• The Registrar is directed to fix the hearing of Misc. Application No. 19 of 2016 without delay.
• The costs of this application shall abide the outcome of the main application, Misc. App. No. 19 of 2016.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (8)

• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I. 13-10 Rule 2(2)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I. 13-10 Rule 6(2)(b)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I. 13-10 Rule 42(2)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I. 13-10 Rule 43(1)
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I. 13-10 Rule 44
• Judicature (Court of Appeal Rules) Directions S.I. 13-10 Rule 53
• Civil Procedure Act Cap 71 s.98
• Constitution of Uganda Article 126(2)(e)

Cases cited (1)

• Hwan Sung Industries Ltd v Tajdin Hussein (Civil Application No. 9 of 2008)

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