The dfcu Bank Ltd has issued a profit warning to shareholders and investors, projecting a loss for the first half of 2026. The lender attributes the expected shortfall primarily to substantial legal costs arising from its defence in the long-running Crane Bank dispute before the English High Court.
In a notice released under Rule 38(3)(c) of the Uganda Securities Exchange Listing Rules, 2025, the bank stated that its unaudited results for the six months ended 30 June 2026 will show a loss compared with the corresponding period last year. Management linked the outcome to rising expenses incurred while contesting claims over the 2017 transfer of selected assets and liabilities from the collapsed Crane Bank.
The case was brought in 2020 by Crane Bank Limited and certain former shareholders against dfcu Limited, dfcu Bank and other parties. The claimants challenge the Bank of Uganda’s 2016 intervention and the subsequent transfer of Crane Bank assets to dfcu in January 2017, alleging the transaction occurred at a significantly undervalued price and formed part of a broader scheme.
Despite the anticipated loss, dfcu emphasised that its core operations remain strong and financially stable. The bank said underlying fundamentals continue to improve and that overall business performance remains on a positive growth path, even as exceptional legal costs weigh on reported results.
The warning follows a recent procedural ruling by Deputy High Court Judge Paul Stanley KC. The judge rejected key elements of dfcu’s attempt to amend its defence, holding that the bank could not treat findings in forensic reports prepared by PricewaterhouseCoopers as established facts without proving them at trial. While dfcu may refer to the existence of the reports and the regulators’ reliance upon them, it cannot present their conclusions as proven.
The court cautioned that incorporating large portions of the reports would expand the scope of the already complex litigation and introduce numerous additional factual disputes. As a result, reliance on the PwC material has been limited to providing context for the decisions taken by the Bank of Uganda and other regulators.
The dispute continues to generate significant legal expenditure for the Ugandan lender as proceedings advance in London.
Email:homelandnewspaper@gmail.com
