AKARERE KA KIREHE v SAHAM ASSURANCE RWANDA LTD (SANLAM ASSURANCES GÉNÉRALES Plc) N’ABANDI

AKARERE KA KIREHE v SAHAM ASSURANCE RWANDA LTD (SANLAM ASSURANCES GÉNÉRALES Plc) N’ABANDI

Only the party that requested review for injustice (Akarere ka Kirehe) could make substantive claims in the rehearing. The insurance contract covered only the insured's compliance with its terms; intentional breach (overloading, unlicensed driver) by the insured (Gatashya Ezra) excluded coverage for both the insured...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RLR V.3-2024
Parties
Applicant: Akarere ka Kirehe; Respondent: Saham Assurance Rwanda Ltd (Sanlam Assurances Générales Plc); Interested Party: Abazungura ba Gatashya Ezra (represented by Nyiramvuyekure Athanasie); Interested Party: Ndagijimana Eugène; Interested Party: Tuyishimire Charles; Interested Party: Mbonyinshuti Jean Damascène
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
31 December 2021
Case Number
RS/INJUST/RC 00002/2021/SC
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (review for Injustice) / Supreme Court Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; lower court judgment modified
Legal Topics
Review for Injustice, Motor Vehicle Insurance, Contractual Liability, Standing in Appeals, Apportionment of Damages
Source Language
rw
Civil Procedure Insurance Law Contract Law Review for Injustice Motor Vehicle Insurance Contractual Liability Standing in Appeals Apportionment of Damages

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Akarere ka Kirehe

Applicant

Saham Assurance Rwanda Ltd (Sanlam Assurances Générales Plc)

Respondent

Abazungura ba Gatashya Ezra (represented by Nyiramvuyekure Athanasie)

Interested Party

Ndagijimana Eugène

Interested Party

Tuyishimire Charles

Interested Party

Mbonyinshuti Jean Damascène

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (review for Injustice) / Supreme Court Final Judgment

  1. 1 Whether a party not requesting review for injustice can make substantive claims in the rehearing
  2. 2 Whether the District (Akarere ka Kirehe) should be liable for damages arising from the accident
  3. 3 Whether the insurance contract covers the incident given breach of contract terms by the insured

Ratio Decidendi

Only the party that requested review for injustice (Akarere ka Kirehe) could make substantive claims in the rehearing. The insurance contract covered only the insured's compliance with its terms; intentional breach (overloading, unlicensed driver) by the insured (Gatashya Ezra) excluded coverage for both the insured and third parties. The District was not a party to the insurance contract and could not be held liable under it. Damages must be borne solely by the heirs of Gatashya Ezra.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; lower court judgment modified

Orders

  • The appeal by Akarere ka Kirehe is upheld; the judgment of the High Court is modified regarding damages against the District.
  • Heirs of Gatashya Ezra are ordered to pay Ndagijimana Eugène, Mbonyinshuti Jean Damascène, and Tuyishimire Charles a total of 1,620,000 Frw in damages.