ABAZUNGURA BA KAREMERA v. RUZINDANA

ABAZUNGURA BA KAREMERA v. RUZINDANA

The claim against Karemera Boniface (and his heirs) was inadmissible because the property in question belonged to Société Générale des Pétroles (SGP), not to Karemera personally, and thus only the company could be sued regarding its property. The heirs lacked standing to be sued in this matter. The first instance...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RCOMA 0069/11/CS
Parties
Appellant: Abazungura ba Karemera Boniface (Umubyeyi Diane, Muhire Berno Didier, Ntwari Brice, Muhayemariya Lise Thérèse); Respondent: Ruzindana Jérémie; Intervener: Guaranty Trust Bank Ltd (ex Fina Bank Ltd)
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
20 June 2014
Case Number
RCOMA 0069/11/CS
Procedural Posture
Commercial Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; first instance judgment set aside for lack of standing.
Legal Topics
Standing (qualité), Corporate Representation, Non Receivability of Claims, Company Property Vs. Personal Property
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Standing (qualité) Corporate Representation Non Receivability of Claims Company Property Vs. Personal Property

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abazungura ba Karemera Boniface (Umubyeyi Diane, Muhire Berno Didier, Ntwari Brice, Muhayemariya Lise Thérèse)

Appellant

Ruzindana Jérémie

Respondent

Guaranty Trust Bank Ltd (ex Fina Bank Ltd)

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Commercial Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the claim against Karemera Boniface (and his heirs) was admissible given the property belonged to Société Générale des Pétroles (SGP) and not to Karemera personally
  2. 2 Whether the proper party was sued

Ratio Decidendi

The claim against Karemera Boniface (and his heirs) was inadmissible because the property in question belonged to Société Générale des Pétroles (SGP), not to Karemera personally, and thus only the company could be sued regarding its property. The heirs lacked standing to be sued in this matter. The first instance judgment was set aside for lack of standing (absence de qualité).

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; first instance judgment set aside for lack of standing.

Orders

  • The objection of lack of standing raised by the heirs of Karemera Boniface is upheld.
  • The judgment RCOM 0181/09/HCC of the Commercial High Court is set aside.