Share
D'ujanga v Babirye and 2 Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 1011 of 2022) [2023] UGHCLD 68 (20 March 2023)
- Citation
- [2023] UGHCLD 68
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- HC: Land Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Nkonge, J
- Case number
- Miscellaneous Application No. 1011 of 2022
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- HC: Land Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Nkonge, J
- Case number
- Miscellaneous Application No. 1011 of 2022
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The application for stay of execution was rendered moot because the execution of the orders in Civil Suit No.309 of 2015 had already been effected, and the subject matter was no longer in existence. The applicant's counsel had previously withdrawn a similar application before the Court of Appeal on the same grounds. As a result, the High Court found that there was no basis to grant the stay, and the application was overtaken by events. Costs were awarded to the respondents as the successful parties.
Court disposition
application dismissed as overtaken by events
Orders
- The application for stay of execution is dismissed.
- Costs are awarded to the respondents.
02
Material facts
Parties
Ronald Denis D'Ujanga
Applicant Counsel: SenindeBabra Harriet Babirye
RespondentFrancis Namenya
RespondentMukasa Henry
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the application for stay of execution is maintainable given the execution has already been effected.
- 02
Whether costs should be awarded to the respondents.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant sought a stay of execution of orders issued in Civil Suit No.309 of 2015 until the final determination of Civil Appeal No.212 of 2022, arguing that execution would render the appeal nugatory.
- Respondent
- The respondents opposed the application, relying on the fact that execution had already been effected and the subject matter was no longer in existence, rendering the application moot.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Civil Procedure Act cap. 71, Orders 43 rule 41 & Order 52 rules 1 & 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1
A stay of execution cannot be granted where execution has already been completed and the subject matter no longer exists.
- 02
General principle of civil procedure
Costs follow the event and are awarded to the successful party.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The application for stay of execution was rendered moot because the execution of the orders in Civil Suit No.309 of 2015 had already been effected, and the subject matter was no longer in existence. The applicant's counsel had previously withdrawn a similar application before the Court of Appeal on the same grounds. As a result, the High Court found that there was no basis to grant the stay, and the application was overtaken by events. Costs were awarded to the respondents as the successful parties.
Court disposition
application dismissed as overtaken by events
- The application for stay of execution is dismissed.
- Costs are awarded to the respondents.
Source and reliance status
HC: Land Division (Uganda)
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
HC: Land Division (Uganda)
Judgment
THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA
(LAND DIVISION)
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.1011 OF 2022
$\mathsf{S}$
(Arising out of Civil Suit No.309 of 2015)
RONALD DENIS D'UJANGA:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
VERSUS
1. BABRA HARRIET BABIRYE
- 2. FRANCIS NAMENYA - 10 3. MUKASA HENRY::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Before: Lady Justice Alexandra Nkonge Rugadya.
Ruling.
Introduction:
The applicant brought this application by notice of motion under the provisions of Sections
15 92 & 98 of the Civil Procedure Act cap. 71, and Orders 43 rule 41 & Order 52 rules 1 & 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 seeking orders that;
1. An order doth issue against the respondents to stay execution of orders against the applicant vide Civil Suit No.309 of 2015 until the final determination of Civil Appeal No.212 of 2022;
20
2. Costs of the application be provided for.
Decision of court:
I have carefully perused the pleadings and submissions filed by each side in relation to this application. It has however come to my attention that another application which is similar in nature was filed and concluded by the Court of Appeal, presided over by Justice of Appeal F. M. S. Egonda Ntende. (Ref. MA No. 0038 of 2023).
As clearly reflected in the proceedings of the appellate court dated 23<sup>rd</sup> February, 2023, whereby counsel Seninde representing the applicant/appellant withdrew the application for stay of execution of the orders of this court, on the ground that execution had already been
30 effected. Since as confirmed the subject matter is no longer in existence this application has therefore been overtaken by events.
Costs awarded to the respondents.
1 Unlow of
Palsung
Alexandra Nkonge Rugadya
Judge
. . . . . . . . . . . .
$\mathbf{L}$
20<sup>th</sup> March, 2023
Delivered by each<br> Onlong<br> $\frac{1}{24|3|}$ $\frac{1}{2023}$
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.