BANQUE POPULAIRE DU RWANDA ATLAS MARA PLC V. NKUSI

BANQUE POPULAIRE DU RWANDA ATLAS MARA PLC V. NKUSI

The Supreme Court held that BPR ATLAS MARA Plc lost in both lower courts for the same reasons, making the second appeal inadmissible. SGES/ATT Ltd was not a party entitled to appeal as it was not fined or ordered to pay. The review application lacked merit as no injustice was found in the Court of Appeal's judgment. Damages for unnecessary lawsuits were denied due to lack of evidence of intent, but Nkusi Evariste was awarded lawyer’s and procedural fees as the prevailing party.

Citation
RLR V.2-2023
Parties
Applicant: BANQUE POPULAIRE DU RWANDA ATLAS MARA PLC; Respondent: Nkusi Evariste; Intervener: SGES/ATT Ltd
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
27 November 2020
Case Number
RS/INJUST/RCOM 0000/2020/ SC
Procedural Posture
Commercial Review / Supreme Court Judgment on Review for Injustice
Outcome
Application for review dismissed; judgment of Court of Appeal sustained.
Legal Topics
Review of Judgments, Inadmissibility of Appeals, Intervention of Third Parties, Negotiable Instruments, Damages, Procedural Fees
Source Language
en, rw
Commercial Law Civil Procedure Review of Judgments Inadmissibility of Appeals Intervention of Third Parties Negotiable Instruments Damages Procedural Fees

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BANQUE POPULAIRE DU RWANDA ATLAS MARA PLC

Applicant

Nkusi Evariste

Respondent

SGES/ATT Ltd

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Commercial Review / Supreme Court Judgment on Review for Injustice

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal erred by declaring inadmissible the second appeal filed by BPR ATLAS MARA Plc
  2. 2 Whether issues related to SGES/ATT Ltd's intervention affected the outcome or admissibility of the appeal
  3. 3 Whether damages and procedural fees are owed

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that BPR ATLAS MARA Plc lost in both lower courts for the same reasons, making the second appeal inadmissible. SGES/ATT Ltd was not a party entitled to appeal as it was not fined or ordered to pay. The review application lacked merit as no injustice was found in the Court of Appeal's judgment. Damages for unnecessary lawsuits were denied due to lack of evidence of intent, but Nkusi Evariste was awarded lawyer’s and procedural fees as the prevailing party.

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed; judgment of Court of Appeal sustained.

Orders

  • Application for review on grounds of injustice is unfounded and dismissed.
  • Judgment RCOMAA 00031/2019/CA of 06/03/2020 is not tainted with injustice and is sustained.