Wakilii

Were v Sewanyana and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 369 of 2012)

High Court · [2013] UGHC 278 · 2013 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for stay of execution arising from dismissal of Company Cause No. 44 of 2007
Decision
Application for stay of execution dismissed with costs to the respondents

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

Application for stay of execution dismissed. Where the underlying application for rectification of a company register and removal of directors was dismissed, there are no executable orders to stay. Intention to appeal per se is not a ground for stay; the applicant must show substantial loss or that the appeal would be rendered nugatory, which was not established.

Outcome

Application for stay of execution dismissed with costs to the respondents

Facts

The applicant sought stay of execution of Justice V.F. Musoke-Kibuuka's ruling delivered 26 April 2012 in Company Cause No. 44 of 2007, which had dismissed the applicant's application for rectification of the register of Goodman Agencies Ltd and removal of the respondents as directors. That ruling found the applicant was lawfully removed as Managing Director by directors controlling 75% of shares and that the respondents were rightfully appointed as directors. The applicant had secured leave to appeal by consent order on 26 November 2012 and filed a Notice of Appeal dated 1 June 2012. The applicant sought to restrain registration of the judgment with the Registrar of Companies pending disposal of the appeal.

Issues

  1. Whether the court should grant a stay of execution of the judgment in Company Cause No. 44 of 2007 pending disposal of an intended appeal.
  2. Whether there were executable orders in the underlying ruling that could be subject to a stay of execution.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the Respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Grounds for Grant — Requirement to Show Substantial Loss
An intention to appeal per se is not a ground for stay of execution and instituting an appeal does not operate as a stay of execution. A party seeking a stay of execution must satisfy the court that there is sufficient cause why the party with judgment should postpone the enjoyment of its benefits. It must be shown that if execution proceeds there may be some irreparable loss caused.
Civil Procedure — Stay of Execution — Absence of Executable Orders
Where an application is dismissed and there are no orders of court granted that can be executed, there is no basis for granting a stay of execution. A stay of execution is only applicable where there are executable orders that may cause loss if carried out pending appeal.
Company Law — Stay of Execution — Effect on Directors Already Appointed
Where a court has ruled that directors were duly appointed and the applicant's challenge to their appointment was dismissed, a stay of execution application cannot have the effect of reversing that ruling or removing the directors from their positions, as this would be contrary to the principles for grant of a stay of execution.

Legislation cited (3)

Cases cited (2)

  • Mugenyi & Co v National Insurance Corporation (Civil Appeal No. 13 of 1984)
  • Wilson Mukiibi v James Semu-Sambwa (Civil Application No. 9 of 2003)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Were v Sewanyana and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 369 of 2012) [2013] UGHC 278 (10 April 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.