The High Court in UK has rejected an attempt by Crane Bank’s lawyers to block a key forensic report authored by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), marking a procedural win for dfcu in the high-stakes financial case.
The case, being heard in the Commercial Division of the English High Court, arises from the contested 2017 acquisition of assets belonging to Crane Bank Limited (CBL) by dfcu Bank, a transaction that followed the controversial takeover of Crane Bank by the Bank of Uganda (BoU).
At the heart of this recent ruling is a forensic audit prepared by PwC Uganda, commissioned by BoU, which investigated alleged irregularities and mismanagement within Crane Bank prior to its closure.
Crane Bank’s legal team had sought to exclude the report on grounds that PwC Uganda was not formally part of the global PwC network and that its contents were inadmissible to establish primary facts.
However, Justice Paul Stanley dismissed these arguments, finding that the PwC report spanning over 150 pages and detailing events as far back as the early 2000s raised serious questions about the bank’s internal operations.
In his ruling, Justice Stanley highlighted key findings from the audit that, if accurate, point to a deliberately misleading balance sheet presentation, efforts to conceal the true identity of shareholders, improper diversion of funds from the bank and preferential transactions with insiders, often termed “sweetheart deals.”
In another noteworthy move, the court ordered Sudhir Ruparelia, founder of the Ruparelia Group and former majority shareholder of Crane Bank, to surrender his mobile phone for forensic examination.
The aim is to determine whether the device contains potentially relevant documents or correspondence tied to the case.
His daughter, Sheena Ruparelia, was also directed to produce materials from her personal email account, further widening the scope of discovery.
These orders reflect the court’s emphasis on transparency and access to potentially critical evidence in what has become a complex international dispute involving allegations of fraud, regulatory failure, and improper conduct during the bank’s collapse and sale.
Background of the Case
Crane Bank was placed under statutory management by the Bank of Uganda in October 2016, citing undercapitalization and insolvency.
In January 2017, BoU announced that dfcu Bank had acquired select assets and liabilities of Crane Bank, a move that triggered intense legal battles in both Ugandan and international courts.
The Ruparelia Group has since challenged the legality of the sale and the findings of the BoU, alleging unfair treatment, procedural irregularities, and reputational damage.
In 2019, Crane Bank (in Receivership) filed a suit in the UK against dfcu, the Bank of Uganda, and other parties, accusing them of acting unlawfully during the resolution process.
The case has since evolved into a broader examination of regulatory actions, ownership structures, and bank governance.
In a statement following the UK court’s latest ruling, dfcu welcomed the decision, stating it reaffirms the integrity of the processes it followed during the acquisition.
“dfcu Bank continues to assert that all actions taken in the acquisition of Crane Bank assets were lawful, transparent, and in full compliance with applicable regulations,” the bank said.
The bank reiterated its commitment to defending itself vigorously in court while upholding international standards of corporate governance and ethical conduct.
The High Court’s decision to admit the PwC report into evidence is likely to have far-reaching implications for how the case proceeds.
