law 12 August 2026 Daily Monitor (Uganda)
Court of Appeal Mandates Muwema Advocates to Deposit $100,000 in Kololo Property Dispute
The Court of Appeal has ordered the law firm Muwema & Co Advocates to deposit $100,000 as security for costs to halt the execution of a High Court judgment concerning a property dispute. Source: https://www.monitor.co.ug/uganda/news/national/court-of-appeal-orders-muwema-advocates-to-deposit-100-000-over-kololo-property-dispute-5556124
The Court of Appeal has directed M/S Muwema & Co Advocates to secure approximately Shs370 million ($100,000) as security for costs. This directive is a condition for granting a stay of execution on a significant monetary judgment stemming from a commercial property dispute with Downtown Investments Limited.
Justice John Mike Musisi of the Court of Appeal issued the ruling, specifying that the funds must either be deposited directly into court or secured via an unconditional bank guarantee from a reputable financial institution within one month. This decision addresses an application by Muwema & Co Advocates, which sought to suspend the enforcement of a High Court judgment while their appeal is heard.
The dispute originated from a 2014 lease agreement where the law firm rented commercial space in Kololo, with an option to purchase. In 2021, the firm attempted to exercise this option by offering $1.05 million, an amount rejected by the landlord as insufficient. This disagreement escalated, leading the landlord to sue for vacant possession, rent arrears, and damages.
The High Court initially ruled in favor of Downtown Investments in February 2026, ordering the law firm to vacate the premises and pay substantial sums for rent arrears, mesne profits, and damages. Muwema & Co Advocates appealed this decision, arguing that exercising the purchase option altered their legal relationship with the landlord and that enforcing the monetary decree would irreparably harm their practice.
Justice Musisi acknowledged the arguable nature of the appeal but rejected the request for a stay without security. He noted that while the property had been repossessed, the monetary awards remained unsettled. The judge deemed $100,000 a fair compromise, balancing the interests of both parties. The order halts monetary execution proceedings but does not undo the eviction, and failure to provide the security within 30 days will result in the stay lapsing.