KAMPALA, Uganda | The High Court of Uganda has ruled against Stanbic Bank Uganda’s attempt to recover a substantial loan from a husband by targeting family property that was mortgaged without his wife’s consent. Delivered by Hon. Lady Justice Nabakooza Flavia, the ruling highlights the legal requirement for spousal consent in any mortgage agreement involving jointly-owned property, reinforcing a critical safeguard for families and shared assets.

The case began when Ntende Rebecca discovered that her husband had mortgaged their family property to secure a UGX 1.37 billion loan without her knowledge. Believing this action violated her rights as a co-owner, Rebecca challenged the legality of the mortgage. In response, Stanbic Bank filed a counter-claim solely against George, the husband, attempting to bypass Rebecca’s challenge and recover the debt through the mortgage on the property.

However, Justice Nabakooza struck down the bank’s approach, ruling that a counter-claim must involve the plaintiff—in this case, Rebecca—who had initiated the original suit. By proceeding without her, the bank’s claim lacked the essential legal standing to hold up in court. The judge reaffirmed that spousal consent is a fundamental requirement in transactions involving shared property, particularly mortgages, which carry significant implications for family security and stability.

This decision emphasizes that spousal consent is not a mere technicality but a vital element in validating mortgage agreements affecting jointly-owned assets. Financial institutions must obtain clear, documented consent from both spouses when family property is used as collateral, or risk having such agreements nullified. For Ntende Rebecca, the ruling means her family’s home is safeguarded, and her right to be included in decisions impacting their assets is affirmed.