Court halts eviction of man from Kagadi SDA church land
Justice Florence Nakachwa, sitting as a single Justice of Appeal, granted the stay in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 842 of 2026, arising from Civil Appeal No. 440 of 2025.
Court halts eviction of man from Kagadi SDA church land
_________________
The Court of Appeal has stayed the eviction of a man from land claimed by Kagadi Seventh-day Adventist Church, pending the hearing and determination of his appeal against a High Court judgment.
Justice Florence Nakachwa, sitting as a single Justice of Appeal, granted the stay in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 842 of 2026, arising from Civil Appeal No. 440 of 2025.
Court documents indicate that Joseph Kasumba Ateenyi had appealed against the January 17, 2025, judgment of Justice Jesse Byaruhanga Rugyema, which ordered him to vacate the disputed land and, in default, be evicted.
The High Court also ordered him to pay the church sh15m in general damages.
Kasumba challenged the decision, raising grounds concerning the alleged fraudulent acquisition of the land, conversion of a lease to freehold, evaluation of evidence and the validity of the church’s title.
In the Court of Appeal, Kasumba argued that his appeal raised serious questions of law and that he would suffer substantial loss if evicted before the appeal was heard.
He told the court that he had a permanent residential house on the disputed land and had already received an eviction notice.
He also pointed out that the church had filed Execution Miscellaneous Application No. 008 of 2026 seeking execution of the decree.
The church opposed the application, arguing that Kasumba had failed to demonstrate substantial loss or reasonable prospects of success and that it was entitled to enjoy the fruits of its judgment.
The judge noted that the memorandum of appeal raised questions concerning the alleged fraudulent acquisition of the land, conversion of a lease to freehold, evaluation of evidence, the validity of the church’s title, and the orders for eviction and general damages.
Justice Nakachwa observed that execution could result in Kasumba’s eviction and possible demolition of his permanent residential structure on the land.
She held that such consequences might not easily be reversed if the appeal ultimately succeeded.
The judge also found that the application had been filed without inordinate delay.
She ruled that the balance of convenience favoured maintaining the status quo pending determination of the appeal.
The costs of the application were ordered to abide the outcome of the appeal.