Empyrean Protocol

Empyrean Intelligence Console

← Back to briefs

Crane Bank Ltd & Ors v DFCU Bank Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 1915 (Comm) (24 July 2025)

Source: Open mirrored case · Original bailii.org

Sanctions — Geo —

Executive Summary

  • The case concerns Crane Bank Ltd (CBL), a formerly leading Ugandan bank placed under statutory management and receivership by the Bank of Uganda in 2016-2017 due to alleged undercapitalization and systemic risk.
  • Claimants allege the Bank of Uganda orchestrated a corrupt scheme to seize CBL’s assets and sell them at a gross undervalue to DFCU Bank Ltd.
  • DFCU defends by relying on PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC) reports commissioned by the Bank of Uganda, which indicate serious mismanagement at CBL.
  • The court’s immediate issue was whether DFCU could amend its defence to plead the PWC reports as factual evidence; partial permission was granted to rely on the reports’ existence and terms but not their conclusions as facts.
  • The case is complex, with over 10,000 pages of evidence and a 12-week trial scheduled for late 2025.

Sanctions Highlights

  • No sanctions implications identified in the case materials.

Emerging Risks

  • Potential reputational risk for DFCU and Bank of Uganda if corruption or mismanagement allegations are proven.
  • Risk of significant financial liability depending on trial findings regarding the valuation and sale process of CBL assets.
  • Uncertainty over the credibility and legal weight of forensic accounting reports (PWC) in cross-jurisdictional regulatory disputes.
  • Protracted litigation may impact investor confidence in Ugandan banking sector governance.

Geopolitical Impact

  • No direct geopolitical significance or involvement of other countries noted.

Economic Intelligence

  • CBL was previously a “highly profitable” bank with a “strong balance sheet” per claimants, audited by KPMG.
  • The Bank of Uganda’s intervention and asset transfer to DFCU followed PWC reports alleging mismanagement, including false balance sheet impressions and insider deals.
  • The sale’s valuation and process are central economic issues, with claimants asserting a “gross undervalue” and sham bidding.
  • The outcome may influence regulatory approaches and asset valuation standards in Uganda’s banking sector.

Strategic Recommendations

  • Monitor trial developments closely for rulings on evidentiary use of forensic reports in financial disputes.
  • Assess potential impacts on banking sector regulatory credibility in Uganda and related jurisdictions.
  • Prepare for possible reputational management strategies for involved financial institutions.
  • Consider implications for due diligence and valuation practices in cross-border banking asset acquisitions.
  • Maintain awareness of litigation timelines and document disclosures for timely intelligence updates.

---

Source Notes: *Sanctions Intelligence Digest* — https://empyreanprotocol.com/litigation/view/www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2025/1915.html

Brief metadata