“Our client was the successful party in Court of Appeal Civil Appeal 252 of 2019 Crane Bank Limited (In Receivership) vs Sudhir Ruparelia & Another where the Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the High Court in High Court Civil Suit 493 of 2017 to wit that the 131 Respondent had no locus to institute proceedings against the Applicant and its plaint did not disclose a cause of action,” Sudhir’s notice of intention to sue partially reads.
According to Sudhir, Kasule has on many occasions tried to frustrate the implementation of court orders and faults her for misleading the institution to defy lawful court rulings including illegal liquidation of the assets of Crane Bank while in receivership.
“TAKE NOTICE that our client has thus decided to institute legal proceedings against you for contempt of court orders for your role in the illegal liquidation of our client’s Bank,” the notice reads.
Sudhir says in his notice of intention to sue that without staying the execution of the judgment of Court of Appeal, Margaret Kasule advised BOU to apply for a temporary injunction restraining him from filing resolutions concerning Crane Bank Limited with Uganda Registration Services Bureau vide MA No. 32 and MA No. 33.
Further, immediately after the dismissal of MA 33 of 2020, Kasule further advised BOU to progress Crane Bank (in Receivership) into liquidation while aware that such a move was contrary to S.95 of the Financial Institutions Act which only envisages a licensed Bank to be put under liquidation.
“You’re the brain that has been behind all this saga of illegally liquidating Crane Bank with the sole intention of depriving our clients the fruits of the orders of the Court of Appeal,” the lawyers’ Lawyers notices reads.
“Take note that our client has decided to Institute legal proceedings against you for Contempt of Court orders for your role in the illegal Liquidation of our client’s bank”.
Ms. Margaret Kasule’s position as head of legal at Bank of Uganda (BoU) has since 2019 came under close public scrutiny as the Central Bank continues to lose several commercial legal battles that have dented its image.
Meanwhile, remember that on 4th October 2021, the Supreme Court found that the receivership of Crane Bank ended on 20th January 2018 Court further found that in placing Crane Bank into liquidation, the Bank of Uganda was in contempt of court orders. The move was intended to circumvent the decision of Court of Appeal hence aimed at preventing the course of justice before.
But Kasule again insisted on placing Crane Bank into Liquidation and instead filed HCCS No. 595 of 2021 in the names of Crane Bank (in Liquidation). In trying to file a suit under the name of Crane Bank (in Liquidation), she was in contempt of orders of the Supreme Court in MA No. 39 of 2020 which held that Crane Bank was a closed bank that could not be progressed into liquidation and that Bank of Uganda was in contempt of orders of the Court of Appeal.
She further went ahead to file an application for review of a decision well knowing that the parties that she was taking to court have since ceased to exist. More so, she further circumvented the decision of the Supreme Court that only recently found her in contempt by the said actions.
”While aware that upon closure of Crane Bank, it ceased to be a financial institution, by notice dated 16th October 2020, you went ahead and advised Bank of Uganda to apply for a temporary injunction restraining our client from filing resolutions concerning Crane Bank Limited with Uganda Registration Services Bureau vide MA No. 32 and MA No. 33.
Immediately after the dismissal of MA 33 of 2020, you further advised Bank of Uganda to progress Crane Bank (in Receivership) into Liquidation while aware that such a move was contrary to S. 95 of the Financial Act which only envisages a licensed Bank to be put under Liquidation. Following your advice, Bank of Uganda on 13th November 2020, went ahead and issued the public notice, putting Crane Bank (In Receivership) into Liquidation and ordered the winding up of affairs.
The move to liquidate Crane Bank while pending Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2020 filed by Bank of Uganda was done in bad faith and was manifestly intended to render the appeal decision of the Supreme Court nugatory”, lawyers wrote, insisting that all this was done yet Ms. Kasule was aware that upon closure of Crane Bank, it ceased to be a financial institution and couldn’t therefore be progressed into liquidation.
Stay logged on for more updates on this saga!!!