COOPILAK v SEBAHIRE N’ABANDI

COOPILAK v SEBAHIRE N’ABANDI

The auction was conducted in accordance with the law: the auction notice was not required to state the base value or attach the valuation report; the property was not registered in the land registry, so seizure in the hands of the registrar was unnecessary; the mortgage claimed by COOPILAK was unregistered and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RS/INJUST/RC 00002/2020/HC/MUS
Parties
Applicant: COOPILAK (Cooperative Des Pecheurs D'Isambaza Dans Le Lac Kivu); Respondent: Sebahire Roger David; Respondent: Nesongane Marina; Respondent: Bucyana Donat; Respondent: Sibomana Eugène; Respondent: JAMES Capobianco, James Jeffrey Towers, Cathryn Virgin (as heirs of James Towers)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
5 May 2023
Case Number
RS/INJUST/RC 00002/2020/HC/MUS
Procedural Posture
Civil (imbonezamubano) Review for Injustice (gusubirishamo Ku Mpamvu Z’akarengane) / High Court (urukiko Rukuru) Judgment on Review
Outcome
Applicant's (COOPILAK) claim for review on grounds of injustice is dismissed; prior judgment stands; respondents awarded costs and attorney fees.
Legal Topics
Auction Annulment, Land Registration, Mortgage Validity, Protected Land (zone Protégée), Damages and Costs, Procedural Requirements for Auction, Standing to Claim Damages
Source Language
rw
Civil Procedure Property Law Land Law Enforcement Law Auction Annulment Land Registration Mortgage Validity Protected Land (zone Protégée) +3 more

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

COOPILAK (Cooperative Des Pecheurs D'Isambaza Dans Le Lac Kivu)

Applicant

Sebahire Roger David

Respondent

Nesongane Marina

Respondent

Bucyana Donat

Respondent

Sibomana Eugène

Respondent

JAMES Capobianco, James Jeffrey Towers, Cathryn Virgin (as heirs of James Towers)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil (imbonezamubano) Review for Injustice (gusubirishamo Ku Mpamvu Z’akarengane) / High Court (urukiko Rukuru) Judgment on Review

  1. 1 Whether the auction of 26/12/2015 violated legal procedures justifying annulment
  2. 2 Whether the property was sold below value due to exclusion of land value
  3. 3 Whether the property was still under mortgage (ingwate) at the time of auction

Ratio Decidendi

The auction was conducted in accordance with the law: the auction notice was not required to state the base value or attach the valuation report; the property was not registered in the land registry, so seizure in the hands of the registrar was unnecessary; the mortgage claimed by COOPILAK was unregistered and expired, thus ineffective; the land was in a protected zone and could not be privately owned or valued in the auction. COOPILAK's claims of loss and procedural irregularity are unfounded. The review for injustice is dismissed, and respondents are awarded costs and attorney fees.

Court Disposition

Applicant's (COOPILAK) claim for review on grounds of injustice is dismissed; prior judgment stands; respondents awarded costs and attorney fees.

Orders

  • COOPILAK to pay each respondent (Sebahire Roger David, Nesongane Marina, Bucyana Donat, Sibomana Eugène) RWF 500,000 as attorney fees.
  • COOPILAK to pay Sibomana Eugène RWF 150,000 for personal litigation expenses.