Wakilii

Wasike v Ssemakula (HCT-04-CV-MA-0009-2012)

High Court · [2013] UGHCCD 35 · 2013 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution pending appeal arising from High Court Civil Appeal No. 0012/2012, which itself arose from Busia Civil Suit No. 28/2009
Decision
Stay of execution granted pending disposal of the appeal

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 under Order 43 rule 4 CPR. The court held that the applicant satisfied all three statutory conditions: substantial loss would result if the stay were refused because the subject matter was real property and ownership remained in dispute; the application was made without unreasonable delay; and adequate security of land worth 30 million shillings had been provided for due performance of the decree.

Outcome

Stay of execution granted pending disposal of the appeal

Facts

The applicant sought a stay of execution under Order 43 rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules following a decision in High Court Civil Appeal No. 0012/2012, which arose from Busia Civil Suit No. 28/2009. The subject matter was real property and ownership remained in contention. An interim order of stay had already been in place for some time. The respondent had changed legal representation from M/s Kamba & Co. Advocates to M/s Madaba & Co. Advocates, but submissions opposing the application were filed by the former firm, creating confusion. The applicant offered security in the form of land at Namaumbi village valued at 30 million shillings.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant satisfied the conditions under Order 43 rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules for a stay of execution pending appeal.

Orders

  • Application for stay of execution granted.
  • Costs to be in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Stay of Execution — Three Statutory Conditions
Under Order 43 rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules, no order for stay of execution shall be made unless the court is satisfied that substantial loss may result to the applicant unless the order is made, that the application has been made without unreasonable delay, and that security has been given by the applicant for the due performance of the decree as may ultimately be binding upon him or her.
Stay of Execution — Substantial Loss — Real Property
Where the subject matter of an appeal is real property and ownership remains in contention, substantial loss may result if a stay of execution is not granted, particularly where there is no enforceable guarantee that the property will not be disposed of during the pendency of the appeal.
Stay of Execution — Sufficiency of Security
Security in the form of land valued at 30 million shillings is sufficient security for the due performance of a decree under Order 43 rule 4 CPR where real property is the subject matter of the underlying dispute.

Legislation cited (1)

  • Civil Procedure Rules O.43 r.4

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Wasike v Ssemakula (HCT-04-CV-MA-0009-2012) [2013] UGHCCD 35 (13 March 2013)
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.