Wakilii

War Child Canada v Siriba Moses (Miscellaneous Application No. 76 of 2024)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 886 · 2025 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution pending application for leave to appeal from Civil Revision No. 0003 of 2023
Decision
Stay of execution granted conditional upon provision of security by bank guarantee within one month

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 stay of execution pending determination of an application for leave to appeal, conditional upon the applicant providing security in the form of a bank guarantee within one month. The court held that the applicant satisfied most requirements under Order 43 Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules: the application was made without unreasonable delay, substantial loss would result if execution proceeded, and there was an imminent threat of execution through pending taxation applications. However, the applicant had not yet furnished security for due performance of the decree, which the court made a condition of the stay order.

Outcome

Stay of execution granted conditional upon provision of security by bank guarantee within one month

Facts

War Child Canada, a humanitarian organisation supporting children affected by war, was sued by Siriba Moses in Moyo Chief Magistrate's Court (Civil Suit No. 0006 of 2022) for recovery of UGX 17,560,000 arising from a purported supply of stationery. The Magistrate's Court awarded the Respondent the contractual sum of UGX 17,650,000 with 15% interest per annum, general damages of UGX 3,000,000 with 10% interest per annum, and costs. War Child Canada filed Civil Revision No. 0003 of 2023 in the High Court to set aside the Magistrate's decision. On 12 June 2024, the High Court dismissed the revision application and upheld the Magistrate's decision. On 4 September 2024, War Child Canada applied for leave to appeal (Miscellaneous Application No. 0067 of 2024). The Respondent's bills of costs totalling UGX 74,850,000 were scheduled for taxation hearings in both the High Court and the Magistrate's Court in October 2024. War Child Canada then applied for a stay of execution pending determination of the leave application and intended appeal.

Issues

  1. Whether there are sufficient grounds to grant an order for stay of execution
  2. What remedies are available for the parties

Orders

  • Application for stay of execution granted.
  • Stay of execution conditional upon the Applicant providing security for due performance of the decree within one month from the date of delivery of this ruling.
  • Security shall take the form of a bank guarantee.
  • Costs of the application awarded to the Applicant.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Conditions for Grant — Order 43 Rule 4 Civil Procedure Rules
A court may grant a stay of execution pending appeal where the applicant demonstrates: (a) that a notice of appeal has been lodged or an essential step towards appeal has been taken; (b) that substantial loss may result unless the stay is granted; (c) that the application has been made without unreasonable delay; (d) that security has been given for due performance of the decree; (e) that there is a serious or imminent threat of execution; (f) that the application is not frivolous and has a likelihood of success; and (g) that the balance of convenience favours the applicant.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Security for Due Performance of Decree — Mandatory Requirement
Under Order 43 Rule 4(3)(c) of the Civil Procedure Rules, provision of security for due performance of the decree is a mandatory requirement for grant of a stay of execution. The security may take various forms including bank guarantee or payment into court, and the form is immaterial so long as the security is adequate to protect the opposite party.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Substantial Loss — Standard of Proof
An applicant for stay of execution must go beyond vague and generalised assertions of substantial loss and must lay a basis upon which the court can make a finding that substantial loss will be suffered. The applicant must specify the kind of loss, give details, and satisfy the court's conscience that such loss will really ensue. Substantial loss must mean something in addition to and different from the ordinary loss which every judgment debtor necessarily suffers when deprived of property in consequence of losing a case.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Imminent Threat of Execution — Taxation of Bill of Costs
The scheduling of taxation hearings for bills of costs constitutes a serious or imminent threat of execution of a decree, as taxation of costs is an essential step a party must take before executing a judgment.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Application for Leave to Appeal — Essential Step Towards Appeal
Where an applicant does not have an automatic right of appeal and requires leave of court to appeal, the filing of an application for leave to appeal constitutes an essential step towards appeal and satisfies the requirement that a notice of appeal has been lodged for purposes of a stay of execution application.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (10)

  • Lawrence Musiitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye (Supreme Court Civil Application No. 18 of 1990)
  • Theodore Ssekikubo and Others v Attorney General and Others (Constitutional Application No. 03 of 2014)
  • John Baptist Kawanga v Namyalo Kevina & Semakula Lawrence (Miscellaneous Application No. 12 of 2017)
  • Kyambogo University v Prof. Isaiah Omolo Ndiege (Court of Appeal No. 341 of 2013)
  • Pan African Insurance Company (U) Ltd v International Air Transport Association (HCT-00-CC-MA-086-2006)
  • Tanzania Cotton Marketing Board v Cogecot Cotton Co. SA (1995-1998) 1 EA 312
  • Bansidhav vs Pribku Dayal AIR 41 1954
  • American Cyanamide Company Limited v Ethicon [1975] AC 396
  • New Vision Newspaper v J.H. Ntabgoba (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 243 of 2004)
  • E.L.T. Kiyimba Kaggwa v Hajji Katende Abdu Nasser (1985) HCB 43

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

War Child Canada v Siriba Moses (Miscellaneous Application No. 76 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 886 (5 August 2025)
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.