KAMPALA — Meera Investments Limited has secured a significant legal victory after the High Court of Uganda at Kampala (Commercial Division) granted a conditional stay of execution in a long-running commercial dispute while firmly upholding several key findings in favour of the property developer.
In a ruling delivered on August 21, 2026, Justice Susan Odongo resolved the contentious issue of electronic notification of the judgment in Meera Investments Limited v FBW (U) Limited & Others in Meera’s favour, rejecting the applicants’ argument that they had not been properly notified of the April 3, 2026 judgment.
The court found that the applicants’ lawyers were registered users of the Electronic Court Case Management Information System (ECCMIS) and that the judgment, having been uploaded onto the system on April 3, constituted effective and conclusive notice to the parties.
The finding is significant because the applicants had relied on the alleged lack of notification to explain why their Notice of Appeal was filed outside the statutory period.
The court held that litigants and their lawyers have an ongoing professional duty to monitor the electronic court registry and cannot rely on their own failure to check the ECCMIS platform to escape procedural deadlines.
Court rejects challenge to Meera’s contractual claim
The ruling also delivered a strong endorsement of the findings made in the original judgment, particularly concerning the contractual relationship between Meera Investments and FBW.
The dispute arose from a professional consultancy agreement entered into in 2012 for architectural, structural and mechanical/electrical engineering services relating to the extension of Kabira Country Club.
The contract was valued at USD375,000, with payments tied to specific milestones. After the project was revived in 2018, disagreements emerged over the timing of further payments and the format of project drawings supplied by the consultants.
The court’s original judgment, delivered on April 3, 2026, found the applicants in breach of contract and professional duties and ordered them to refund USD132,750, pay USD108,500 in special damages and USD500,000 in general damages, in addition to interest and costs.
In the latest ruling, Justice Odongo rejected the applicants’ substantive grounds of appeal, stating that the trial judgment remained legally and technically sound on the disputed issue concerning the usability of the project deliverables.
The court specifically found that the applicants’ use of different corporate names did not allow them to evade their contractual obligations, applying the doctrine of estoppel after finding that they had accepted payments and undertaken professional obligations under the relevant corporate names.
Court says appeal has no likelihood of success on merits
Perhaps the strongest aspect of the ruling for Meera was the court’s assessment of the applicants’ proposed appeal.
Although the court found that the applicants had demonstrated a prima facie right to pursue an appeal for purposes of considering the stay application, it expressly stated that their substantive appeal had “zero likelihood of success on its merits.”
This distinction allowed the court to consider the other requirements for a stay without disturbing the substantive findings that had been made in Meera’s favour.
The court also maintained that the USD132,750 refund represented money actually paid by Meera for construction-phase services that were never rendered.
It described this portion of the award as an undisputed contractual refund, distinguishing it from the contested damages awards.
Applicants ordered to secure Meera’s USD132,750
As a condition for the stay, the applicants have been ordered to deposit USD132,750 in court or provide an unconditional, irrevocable and on-demand bank guarantee of the same amount from a reputable Ugandan commercial bank within 45 days.
Failure to comply will automatically vacate the stay and give Meera Investments the freedom to proceed with execution of the entire judgment without seeking another court order.
The court further ordered that the costs of the application will abide by the outcome of the intended appeal.
A significant protection for Meera
The ruling therefore leaves Meera Investments in a strong position as the dispute moves towards the Court of Appeal.
While the High Court temporarily halted execution to protect the applicants’ ability to pursue their appeal, it did so subject to a substantial security requirement and without overturning the original judgment in Meera’s favour.
The court’s findings on ECCMIS notification, the applicants’ contractual obligations and the undisputed USD132,750 refund provide important legal protection for Meera as it awaits the next stage of the litigation.
The ruling was dated, signed and delivered electronically on August 21, 2026.
The post High Court Backs Meera Investments, Upholds Key Findings in FBW Dispute appeared first on Watchdog Uganda.