Former FDC official told to repay Shs 383 m loan he took from Pride Bank

Former opposition politician James Birungi Ozo has been ordered to repay a Shs 383 million loan he took from Pride after the court rejected his attempt to stop the bank from enforcing a court order.

Ozo, who was once a prominent official in the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) before crossing to the National Resistance Movement (NRM) in 2019, had asked the High Court to reopen a case that had already been decided in favour of Pride Bank.

However, Justice Susan Abinyo ruled that Ozo had failed to provide convincing reasons for cancelling the earlier court decision.

The dispute started after Ozo borrowed Shs383.66 million from Pride Bank on September 8, 2022. According to the bank, Ozo failed to repay the money as agreed. The bank then took him to court to recover the debt.

In June 2024, Ozo received court documents from Pride Bank informing him about the case and requiring him to respond within 15 days.

Ozo says he immediately took the documents to his lawyers at KGN Advocates for advice, and his lawyers told him to file a defence within the 15-day period, which he did.

But later, the court entered judgment against him because he had not followed another legal requirement that applied to the type of case Pride Bank had filed.

Feeling unfairly treated, Ozo returned to court and asked the judge to cancel the judgment and allow him to defend himself fully. He told the court that he simply followed the instructions that had been given to him.

Pride Bank’s lawyer, Harriet Barbara Kayaga Sentomero, argued that Ozo had lawyers and should have known the correct legal procedure.

The bank also argued that Ozo had admitted taking the loan and had not shown any strong defence against the bank’s claim.

The bank further told the court that setting aside the judgment would only delay recovery of money that had remained unpaid for a long time.

In her ruling, Justice Abinyo acknowledged that the summons served on Ozo directed him to file a defence within 15 days, noting that he followed those instructions after consulting his lawyers.

However, she said Ozo’s lawyers should have looked more carefully at all the documents they received and understood the nature of the case.

“The court takes cognizance of the fact that [Ozo] took the impugned summons and specially endorsed plaint to his advocate, in which counsel filed a defence instead of an application for leave to appear and defend,” Justice Abinyo said.

She added that Ozo’s lawyers focused too much on the summons and ignored other important documents that showed what was required.

After reviewing all the evidence, she concluded that Ozo had not given a good enough reason for the judgment to be cancelled. She also accused Ozo of trying to delay the bank from recovering its money.

“Accordingly, this court finds that the instant application is intended to cause further delays in the execution of the decree, which is an abuse of the process of the court,” Justice Abinyo said.

She dismissed Ozo’s application and ordered him to repay the loan plus the legal costs incurred by Pride Bank in defending the case.

Read Next Article