Double Trouble! Court Orders FBW To Secure SHS500M Or Risk Full Execution Of Meera Judgment

By Frank Kamuntu 

The High Court Commercial Division has granted FBW (U) Limited and its directors, Paul Moores and Nigel Tilling, a temporary stay of execution of a USD741,250 judgment awarded in favour of Meera Investments Limited, owned by property tycoon Dr Sudhir Ruparelia.

However, the court has attached a stringent condition to the relief, requiring FBW and its directors to secure USD132,750, equivalent to about Shs500 million, within 45 days.

In a ruling delivered electronically on August 21, 2026, Justice Susan Odongo ordered the applicants to either deposit the USD132,750 in court or provide an unconditional, irrevocable and on-demand bank guarantee for the same amount from a reputable commercial bank licensed in Uganda.

The judge warned that failure to meet the condition within the stipulated 45 days would automatically vacate the stay, leaving Meera Investments at liberty to proceed with execution of the entire judgment without seeking another court order.

The ruling is the latest development in a long-running commercial dispute arising from architectural and consultancy services provided in connection with the extension of Kabira Country Club.

The original agreement provided for a professional fee of USD375,000, but the relationship later deteriorated over payment milestones, construction drawings and the format in which design files were supplied.

In its judgment of April 3, 2026, the High Court found FBW and its directors liable 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.

FBW subsequently applied for a stay of execution pending an intended appeal, arguing that immediate enforcement of the judgment would cause substantial loss and could potentially cripple its architectural business.

Meera Investments, represented through its Director Dr Sudhir Ruparelia, opposed the application, arguing that the applicants had failed to satisfy the legal requirements for a stay and that the company had already been deprived of its money for years.

Justice Odongo, however, found that the applicants had demonstrated a prima facie right to pursue an appeal and that immediate enforcement of the USD741,250 decree could expose their business to serious and potentially irreversible harm.

The court nevertheless drew an important distinction between the different components of the judgment.

According to the ruling, the USD132,750 refund represents money actually paid by Meera Investments for the disputed construction milestones and constitutes the undisputed principal amount.

The USD108,500 special damages and USD500,000 general damages, on the other hand, remain contested on appeal.

The court therefore declined to require security for the entire judgment amount, instead making the stay conditional on securing the USD132,750 principal sum.

For Meera Investments, the order preserves a clear path to enforcement if FBW fails to meet the court’s condition.

If the applicants do not deposit the money or furnish the required bank guarantee within 45 days, the stay will automatically lapse, allowing Meera Investments to pursue execution of the full USD741,250 judgment, together with applicable interest and costs.

The court further directed that costs of the stay application will abide by the outcome of the intended appeal.

The decision means that while FBW has temporarily halted execution as it pursues its intended appeal, the company must first secure the undisputed USD132,750 amount at the centre of the court’s order.

For Meera Investments, the ruling provides an important safeguard over the principal amount while the wider dispute proceeds through the appellate process.