Prominent Ugandan businessman Haruna Sentongo has suffered a major legal setback after the Court of Appeal ruled in favor of I&M Bank Uganda Limited, ordering him to pay UGX 10.3 billion, plus interest and damages.
The ruling brings an end to a prolonged legal battle that began in 2019 when Sentongo was sued for defaulting on a substantial loan.
The case highlights the growing legal and financial pressures on high-profile Ugandan entrepreneurs facing disputes with financial institutions. Sentongo’s loss raises critical questions about contract enforcement, banking transparency, and corporate accountability in Uganda’s financial sector.
The legal dispute between Haruna Sentongo and I&M Bank dates back to January 2019, when the bank then known as Orient Bank Limited sued him for failing to repay a UGX 10.3 billion loan. The High Court Commercial Division ruled in favor of the bank in December 2022, directing Sentongo to settle the full loan amount, along with UGX 150 million in damages and an annual interest rate of 22% from the date of his first default.
Sentongo, however, challenged the ruling, arguing that the bank had breached its contractual obligations and failed in its fiduciary duties. He further alleged that the bank had misrepresented the loan terms and used undue influence in securing the agreement.
Despite his appeal, the Court of Appeal dismissed his case, maintaining that Sentongo was fully liable for the debt. In a revised ruling, the court set a 12.5% annual interest rate from January 2019 until full repayment. Additionally, the court upheld the UGX 150 million general damages awarded to I&M Bank, subject to a 6% annual interest rate from the judgment date.
This ruling underscores the legal risks associated with financial disputes and reinforces the authority of banks in enforcing loan agreements. It also sends a clear message to business leaders about the importance of honoring financial commitments.
With the ruling now final, Sentongo faces significant financial strain, as failure to comply with the court’s directive could lead to asset seizures or other legal actions by the bank. The case serves as a warning to other high-profile business figures navigating Uganda’s financial landscape.
