Sudhir, Bank of Uganda Lawyers Case Ruling For Next Week

Sudhir, Bank of Uganda Lawyers Case Ruling For Next Week

Accessdome.com: an accessible web community

By Andrew Irumba

Kampala: Ruling of the case which city businessman Sudhir Ruparelia filed in court against Bank of Uganda lawyers, accusing them of having conflict of interest in his case against BOU, has been set for April 29th, 2019.

In the said case, Sudhir wants the new lawyers hired by Bank of Uganda declared as having conflict of interest, and therefore unfit to represent Bank of Uganda in the commercial dispute against him following the closure of his defunct Crane Bank. This new development was communicated to all parties who were eagerly waiting in court by Justice Gadenya Wolimbwa who notified them that the ruling was ready and would only be delivered next week. Sudhir, through his real estate company; Crane Management Services, sued Dfcu bank, demanding rental arrears worth Shs2.9b and USD385,728.54 in respect of tenancies of suit properties that were formally owned by Crane Bank. In his suit, Crane Management services claim that when Dfcu took over management of Crane Bank, it illegally took possession of the rental facilities from which the real estate company seeks to recover its arrears. However, in defence, Dfcu contracted Sebalu, Lule and Advocates to handle the matter, although Sudhir says he contracted the same law firm in 2006 to draw and review tenancy agreements in respect of the said rental premises, thus there is conflict between the lawyer and his clients. “In view of the advocate-client relationship between the applicant (Crane Management Services Ltd) and the 1st respondent (Sebalu & Lule advocates), the latter’s continued participation as defence counsel for the 2nd respondent (Dfcu bank) herein, which is the defendant in High Court Civil Suit (HCCS) No. 109/2018 against the applicant/plaintiff, is prejudicial to the applicant’s head suit,” the petition reads in part.

He contends that during their client-advocate Interaction with the firm, he revealed privileged and confidential information which Dfcu can exploit to his disadvantage in the present dispute before court. In responses to his worries, Sebalu & Lule advocates, being represented by Peter Walubiri, asked the judge to dismiss the application for lack of merit, saying the tenancy agreements drawn in 2006 are not confidential in any way to dent Sudhir’s case. Sudhir also wants court to issue a permanent injunction, restraining Sebalu & Lule Advocates from appearing as defence counsel for dfcu bank in the other court case that the two principals are battling out. In December 2017, the Commercial disqualified Mr Masembe and Mr Mpanga from the Shs397b Sudhir  case against Bank of Uganda (BoU), citing conflict of interest. In his ruling delivered on December 21, 2017, the head of the commercial court division, Justice Wangutusi stated that David Mpanga of A.F. Mpanga Advocates and Timothy Masembe of MMAKS Advocates acted in violation of the Advocates (Professional Conduct) regulations. Section 4 of the regulation provides that an advocate shall not accept instructions from any person in respect of a contentious or non-contentious matter if the matter involves a former client and the advocate as a result of acting for the former client is aware of any facts which may be prejudicial to the client in that matter. Court documents further indicate that when Dfcu bank took over the assets and liabilities of Crane Bank, it also took over occupation and use of the said rented properties from which the real estate company wants to recover accumulated rent arrears from dfcu bank. Some of the properties cited include; Crane Bank branches at plot 9 on Market Street, plot 1-13, Jinja Road, plot 47, Republic Road-Mbale, Speke Hotel (1996), Pot 19 Cooper Road (Crane Plaza), plot 20, Kampala Road –Crane Bank ATM.

 

Accessdome.com: an accessible web community

Related Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: