BRD v. NGEZAHAYO N’ABANDI

BRD v. NGEZAHAYO N’ABANDI

The Supreme Court found that the MoU of 30/09/2010 was submitted after the hearing was closed and relied upon in the High Commercial Court's judgment without reopening proceedings or allowing the opposing party to contest it, violating the contradictory principle and thus conferring jurisdiction for a second appeal...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RCOMAA 0076/12/CS
Parties
Applicant: BRD Ltd; Respondent: Ngezahayo Rutamu Vincent; Respondent: Kavumba Emmanuel; Respondent: Ndahumba Jean Baptiste; Respondent: Umuhoza Francine
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
10 April 2015
Case Number
RCOMAA 0076/12/CS
Procedural Posture
Commercial Appeal / Second Appeal Jurisdiction Determination
Outcome
Supreme Court has jurisdiction; hearing to continue
Legal Topics
Appellate Jurisdiction, Admissibility of Evidence, Contradictory Principle
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Appellate Jurisdiction Admissibility of Evidence Contradictory Principle

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BRD Ltd

Applicant

Ngezahayo Rutamu Vincent

Respondent

Kavumba Emmanuel

Respondent

Ndahumba Jean Baptiste

Respondent

Umuhoza Francine

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Commercial Appeal / Second Appeal Jurisdiction Determination

  1. 1 Whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to hear the second appeal based on a document submitted after the hearing and relied upon in the judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court found that the MoU of 30/09/2010 was submitted after the hearing was closed and relied upon in the High Commercial Court's judgment without reopening proceedings or allowing the opposing party to contest it, violating the contradictory principle and thus conferring jurisdiction for a second appeal under Article 28 of Organic Law No. 03/2012.

Court Disposition

Supreme Court has jurisdiction; hearing to continue

Orders

  • Hearing to continue on 02/06/2015
  • Court fees suspended