By Joseph Kiggundu
KAMPALA — Businessman Sudhir Ruparelia is pursuing a multimillion-euro claim in the English courts over the 2017 transfer of assets and liabilities of Crane Bank to dfcu Bank, alleging that the transaction was unlawful.
Mr Ruparelia and other former Crane Bank shareholders are seeking damages of at least €200 million, equivalent to about Shs820 billion, with the value of the claim potentially increasing as the case progresses.
The dispute forms part of a long-running legal battle arising from the intervention of the Bank of Uganda (BoU) in Crane Bank in 2016 and the subsequent transfer of selected assets and liabilities to dfcu Bank in January 2017. The case is being heard in the High Court of England and Wales.
Crane Bank, founded by Mr Ruparelia in the 1990s, was placed under statutory management by the central bank in October 2016 after BoU said the institution was experiencing serious financial difficulties.
The claimants now allege that the eventual transaction with dfcu was conducted at a substantial undervalue and without the safeguards they say should have accompanied such a major transaction.
Among those facing the claim are dfcu Bank, dfcu Limited, Rabo Partnerships and former senior officials linked to the transaction, including Albert Jonkergouw and Willem Cramer. The case also includes other defendants. The English court record lists Crane Bank, Mr Ruparelia and members of his family among the claimants.
Mr Ruparelia has alleged that Rabo Partnerships and the two former Rabobank executives, who were involved with dfcu, proceeded with the transaction despite information that he says should have raised concerns about the circumstances surrounding the sale.
One of the allegations concerns an email reportedly received in late 2016 relating to $27.5 million from the disposal of a portfolio of Crane Bank loans. The claimants contend that the money was destined for the central bank without being properly recorded and characterise the payment as a bribe.
They further contend that dfcu became involved in the transaction after being approached by BoU and that the bank acquired Crane Bank’s assets without an independent valuation reflecting their alleged market worth.
The defendants have disputed the allegations. Lawyers representing the parties have generally declined to comment on the substance of the case while the proceedings remain before the courts.
The dispute has previously gone through several stages in the English courts. In 2022, the High Court considered jurisdictional challenges brought by some defendants, while the Court of Appeal subsequently ruled in 2023 on the ability of parts of the claim to proceed in England.
The proceedings have continued through further procedural hearings, including judgments in March 2026 dealing with matters relating to the parties’ pleadings and disclosure.
The case has also drawn attention to developments in Uganda, where parliamentary inquiries previously examined the circumstances surrounding the takeover and transfer of Crane Bank’s assets.
Mr Ruparelia has also raised the case of Patrick Ho, a former Hong Kong-based intermediary who was convicted in the United States over bribery offences involving Ugandan and other officials. The claimants have linked that episode to allegations concerning attempts to find a buyer for Crane Bank, although the relevance and interpretation of those events remain matters for the court.
The claimants, represented by Greenberg Traurig, say they have obtained extensive internal correspondence and other documents which they intend to rely on in support of their case.
The legal battle has already generated substantial costs for the parties and represents another chapter in the dispute that began with BoU’s intervention in Crane Bank nearly a decade ago.
The London proceedings run alongside litigation and other legal challenges in Uganda concerning the central bank’s handling of Crane Bank and the subsequent transfer of its assets and liabilities to dfcu.