The Supreme Court stay in Bitature case has given businessman Patrick Bitature and his companies temporary relief in their long-running loan dispute with South African investment firm Vantage Mezzanine Fund II Partnership. The order stops execution of a Court of Appeal ruling that struck out their appeal, keeping the case on hold until the Supreme Court hears their substantive application for a stay of execution.
Justice Elizabeth Musoke delivered the ruling. She explained that the Supreme Court has powers under Rule 2 (2) of its Rules to issue interim orders. According to her, such action was needed to protect the applicants’ right to appeal and prevent the process from becoming meaningless.
The case began in December 2014 when Vantage Mezzanine lent $10 million to Simba Properties Investment Company. Bitature’s firms — Simba Telecom, Elgon Terrace Hotel, and Linda Properties — guaranteed the loan. When Vantage accused the companies of default, the dispute went to arbitration before the London International Chamber of Commerce. In July 2023, the tribunal issued a final award against Simba Properties, followed by an addendum in August.
Vantage then asked the Commercial Division of the High Court to enforce the award. In November 2023, Justice Ocaya issued interim orders stopping Simba companies and their guarantors from altering ownership of mortgaged properties or shareholding. These measures sought to protect Vantage’s interests.
Bitature and his associates filed a notice of appeal. On August 22, 2025, however, the Court of Appeal struck it out. Justices Egonda-Ntende, Luswata, and Nambayo ruled that the Arbitration and Conciliation Act did not allow such an appeal. This setback pushed Bitature to turn to the Supreme Court for relief.
Counsel for the applicants, Brain Moogi Brian, argued that they had filed a valid notice of appeal on August 28, 2025, along with a substantive stay application. He claimed these steps satisfied the requirements for an interim stay. Lawyers for Vantage disagreed. They insisted the notice was defective and said there was no imminent threat of execution.
Justice Musoke rejected that argument. She noted that even with some formal defects, the notice still showed a clear intention to appeal. That was enough for the court to act. She also pointed out that a successful party normally seeks immediate enforcement of a decree. From that, she concluded that the threat of execution was real and imminent.
The Supreme Court granted a stay of execution of the Court of Appeal’s decision in Civil Application No. 305 of 2025. The court ruled that the costs would depend on the outcome of the substantive application. Justice Musoke added that questions about jurisdiction and competence of the appeal would be addressed later. For now, the main goal was to preserve the status quo and safeguard the applicants’ right to be heard.
This ruling gives Patrick Bitature and his companies a temporary reprieve. They now have more time to pursue their case in Uganda’s highest court. The final outcome will determine whether the Ugandan businessman or the South African investors gain the upper hand in this high-stakes financial dispute.
READ: Ham Enterprises vs. Diamond Trust Bank: Supreme Court Weighs In on Landmark Case
