By Kerry Howard Mwesigwa.
Businessman Hamis has made a plea to the Supreme Court, seeking to postpone the judgment date in his case against Diamond Trust Bank (DTB) Uganda and DTB Kenya. Kiggundu is aiming to recover Shs120 billion from the banks, alleging unlawful, illicit practices and is requesting to adduce additional evidence to substantiate his claims.
Records reveal that between 2011 and 2016, Kiggundu secured loans exceeding Shs120 billion from DTB Uganda and DTB Kenya to finance his real estate business ventures. However, a dispute emerged when the banks accused him of failing to fulfill his loan obligations, amounting to Shs39 billion, and threatened to seize his mortgaged properties.
In response to the banks’ allegations, Kiggundu initiated legal proceedings. In October 2020, the Commercial Court ruled in his favor, ordering DTB Uganda to reimburse the deducted funds. Justice Henry Peter Adonyo determined that the deductions were made without Kiggundu’s consent, as he had already repaid the loans in full.
Unsatisfied with the ruling, the banks sought relief from the Principal Judge Dr Flavian Zeija, resulting in a stay of execution. Subsequently, the Court of Appeal overturned the Commercial Court’s decision and ordered a retrial presided over by a different judge, intensifying the legal battle for Kiggundu.
Having lodged an appeal with the Supreme Court, Kiggundu presented multiple grounds for his case, including his contention that the Court of Appeal had failed to address the core issue of illegality central to the dispute. However, Kiggundu now seeks a postponement of the judgment to allow for the presentation of additional evidence from the Central Bank of Kenya, further substantiating his claim of impropriety committed by DTB Kenya.
Dated June 9, 2023, Kiggundu’s application highlights the denial of his fundamental right to be heard, protected under Article 28 of the Constitution. He argues that it would be a profound injustice for the Supreme Court, the highest judicial authority in Uganda, to permanently deny him the opportunity to present his case, particularly considering that the court’s decisions are deemed final and un-appealable.
The new application before the Supreme Court is yet to be fixed for hearing.
