Butime Katabarwa v Standard Chartered Bank (Civil Suit No. 963 of 2020)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
Held that a bank has a fiduciary duty to keep its customer informed of the outcome of fraud investigations. Although the bank properly investigated a fraudulent debit within the stipulated timeline and refunded the money, its failure to communicate the investigation results to the customer constituted a breach of fiduciary duty. The bank was not liable for the underlying fraud where third parties stole the customer's card details and made unauthorized online transactions. General damages of UGX 15,000,000 were awarded for breach of the duty to inform.
Outcome
Judgment entered for the plaintiff with award of general damages of UGX 15,000,000, interest at court rate on damages from judgment date, and costs
Facts
The plaintiff held an account with the defendant bank. On 21 August 2020, UGX 5,816,563 was debited from his account without authorization and credited to an account called Youth Services. The plaintiff reported the matter on 22 August 2020. The defendant confirmed receipt and stated investigations would take 60 days. Investigations by Visa Incorporated revealed that the plaintiff's Visa card details were stolen by a third party and used to make unauthorized online payments. On 24 October 2020, exactly 60 days later, the money was refunded to the plaintiff's account without any communication from the bank regarding the investigation outcome or findings. The plaintiff sued for breach of banker-customer relationship, breach of duty of care, and compensation.
Issues
- Whether the plaintiff has a cause of action against the defendant.
- Whether the defendant breached the banker-customer relationship.
- What are the remedies available to the parties.
Orders
- The Plaintiff is awarded general damages of UGX 15,000,000.
- Interest is awarded on the general damages at the court rate from the date of judgment until payment in full.
- Costs of the suit are awarded to the plaintiff.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (2)
Cases cited (8)
- Auto Garage & Others v Motokov No. 3 (1971) EA 514
- Lucy Nelima & 2 Others v Bank of Baroda Uganda Limited (Civil Suit No. 55 of 2015)
- Makua Nairuba Mabel v Crane Bank Ltd (Civil Suit No. 380 of 2009)
- Simex International, Inc. v. Court of Appeals No. 88013, 19 March 1990, 183 SCRA 360
- Konark Investments (U) Ltd v Stanbic Bank Uganda Ltd (Civil Suit No. 116 of 2010)
- Barclays Bank v Quince Care Ltd and Another [1992] 4 All ER 331
- Moses Ssali (a.k.a Bebe Cool) & Others v Attorney General & Others (HCCS No. 86 of 2010)
- Uganda Commercial Bank v Kigozi [2002] 1 EA 305
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.