[2002] UGHC 42

[2002] UGHC 42

The court found that the Plaintiff companies were used as conduits by their Managing Director, Lawrence Kasasa Kasekese, to negotiate and receive the proceeds of fraudulent cheques issued by Total (U) Ltd and Caltex Oil Ltd. The proximity in time between the incorporation of the companies, the opening of their bank...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2002] UGHC 42
Parties
Plaintiff: D.K. Construction Co. Ltd; Plaintiff: Jametex Intra Sales Ltd; Defendant: Barclays Bank of Uganda Limited
Court
High Court of Uganda
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Civil Suit No. 644 of 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Judgment
Outcome
suit dismissed; judgment for defendant on counter-claim
Legal Topics
Lifting Corporate Veil, Constructive Trust, Fraudulent Transactions, Beneficial Ownership, Banking Liability
Source Language
en
Commercial and Corporate Banking and Finance Lifting Corporate Veil Constructive Trust Fraudulent Transactions Beneficial Ownership Banking Liability

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D.K. Construction Co. Ltd

Plaintiff

Jametex Intra Sales Ltd

Plaintiff

Barclays Bank of Uganda Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the money Shs.24,857,500/= belongs in law or equity to the first Plaintiff or the Defendant.
  2. 2 Whether Ug. Shs.17,606,402/= belongs in law or equity to the second Plaintiff or the Defendant.
  3. 3 Whether the veil of incorporation should be lifted in respect of the Plaintiffs and Lawrence Kasasa Kasekese.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Plaintiff companies were used as conduits by their Managing Director, Lawrence Kasasa Kasekese, to negotiate and receive the proceeds of fraudulent cheques issued by Total (U) Ltd and Caltex Oil Ltd. The proximity in time between the incorporation of the companies, the opening of their bank accounts, and the issuance of the disputed cheques, as well as the payments made to employees of the Oil companies, supported the conclusion that the companies were a façade for fraudulent activity. The court determined that this was an appropriate case to pierce the corporate veil and hold that the Defendant bank is entitled to retain the disputed monies in equity....

Court Disposition

suit dismissed; judgment for defendant on counter-claim

Orders

  • The suit is dismissed with costs.
  • Judgment is entered for the Defendant on the counter-claim.