Businessman Dr Sudhir Ruparelia has asked Parliament to scrutinise the basis of a Shs219.459 billion claim by the Bank of Uganda against Crane Bank and its former shareholders, arguing that they should not be held personally responsible for financial obligations arising after the regulator took control of the institution.
In a written submission to Parliament’s Committee on Commissions, Statutory Authorities and State Enterprises (COSASE), Ruparelia challenged the central bank to explain how the amount was calculated and identify the transactions behind the outstanding claim.
His argument centres on the events of October 20, 2016, when the Bank of Uganda intervened in Crane Bank, suspended its board and appointed a statutory manager to take charge of its operations.
According to Ruparelia, the former shareholders lost control of the bank from that point and had no authority over decisions made during the subsequent period of statutory management.
He maintains that they were not involved in the financial arrangements that followed the takeover, including the January 2017 transfer of Crane Bank’s assets and liabilities to dfcu Bank.
Dispute Over Responsibility for the Shs219.4 Billion
Ruparelia’s submission raises questions about the legal basis for transferring financial obligations incurred under the central bank’s management to the former shareholders.
He argues that the principle of limited liability separates a company’s financial obligations from the personal liabilities of its shareholders. In his view, shareholders cannot automatically be made personally responsible for debts arising from transactions undertaken by the bank after they had been removed from its management.
He has also questioned how the central bank accounted for funds used during the statutory management period.
Ruparelia says the Bank of Uganda retained control of Crane Bank’s records and residual assets but did not provide the former directors with a detailed accounting of how the institution was managed following the intervention.
He further argues that the former shareholders should not be held responsible for expenditure incurred after the takeover, particularly when they had been excluded from the bank’s operations.
Bank of Uganda Explains How the Amount Arose
The dispute follows testimony by Bank of Uganda Governor Michael Atingi-Ego before COSASE, where he identified Shs219.459 billion reflected in the central bank’s financial statements as at June 30, 2025, as recoverable from Crane Bank and its former shareholders.
During the hearing, Atingi-Ego told MPs that Crane Bank had sought approximately Shs466 billion in lender-of-last-resort support.
He explained that some obligations had been entered into before the takeover but only became payable after the central bank had assumed control of the institution.
These included letters of credit that matured when Crane Bank’s clearing and correspondent accounts did not have sufficient funds to meet the payments.
According to the Governor, the Bank of Uganda provided liquidity to settle the outstanding obligations. The central bank subsequently received approximately Shs200 billion from dfcu Bank following the transfer of Crane Bank’s assets and liabilities.
The explanation has become central to the disagreement, with Ruparelia questioning why the former shareholders should bear personal responsibility for payments made under the regulator’s administration.
Previous Court Battles Return to the Spotlight
Ruparelia has also drawn attention to the earlier legal dispute in which the Bank of Uganda, acting through Crane Bank in receivership, sued him and Meera Investments for approximately Shs397 billion.
The Commercial Court dismissed the case in August 2019 and awarded costs against the central bank. The Court of Appeal upheld the decision in June 2020.
In September 2021, the Bank of Uganda withdrew its appeal to the Supreme Court and undertook to pay costs at all levels.
The history of the litigation also featured during the COSASE proceedings, with committee chairperson Muwada Nkunyingi referring to the earlier court battles as MPs examined the central bank’s position on the former shareholders’ liability.
Ruparelia Prepares to Appear Before Parliament
Ruparelia has indicated that he is willing to appear before COSASE during the first week of December after returning from travel.
He has requested access to the Auditor General’s report before the appearance, saying he needs the document to prepare his response to the issues under investigation.
The committee’s inquiry is unfolding alongside separate proceedings in the High Court of England and Wales, where Crane Bank, Ruparelia and other former shareholders are pursuing claims against dfcu Bank and other defendants over the transfer of the bank’s assets.
The defendants’ responses to those claims remain part of the ongoing court proceedings.
During the parliamentary hearing, Atingi-Ego cautioned that discussions about Crane Bank could have implications for the London case, urging MPs to consider the fact that some related issues remain before a foreign court.
COSASE has yet to determine whether the former shareholders are personally liable for the Shs219.459 billion claimed by the Bank of Uganda. The committee’s examination of the takeover, subsequent financial transactions and the legal responsibilities of the parties is expected to be important in establishing the basis of the disputed amount.