DAYENU HOTEL LTD v BRD PLC NABANDI.

DAYENU HOTEL LTD v BRD PLC NABANDI.

The court held that the supplementary claim by DAYENU Hotel Ltd was properly characterized as a civil matter within the jurisdiction of the civil courts because it was ancillary to the main claim for property registration. However, the court found that DAYENU Hotel Ltd had no legal basis to demand reimbursement from...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RCAA00036/2022/CA
Parties
Appellant: DAYENU Hotel Ltd; Respondent: BRD Plc; Respondent: Gasana Gaspard; Respondent: Dusabimana Clothilde
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
1 July 2023
Case Number
RCAA00036/2022/CA
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Supplementary Claims, Ownership Registration, Loan Repayment, Corporate Personality, Subrogation
Source Language
rw
Civil Procedure Property Law Contract Law Supplementary Claims Ownership Registration Loan Repayment Corporate Personality Subrogation

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DAYENU Hotel Ltd

Appellant

BRD Plc

Respondent

Gasana Gaspard

Respondent

Dusabimana Clothilde

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the supplementary claim by DAYENU Hotel Ltd for reimbursement of funds paid on behalf of Gasana and Dusabimana is admissible and within the jurisdiction of the civil court.
  2. 2 Whether DAYENU Hotel Ltd is entitled to reimbursement from BRD Plc for funds paid on behalf of Gasana and Dusabimana and for improvements made to the property.
  3. 3 Whether costs and attorney fees are due in this appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the supplementary claim by DAYENU Hotel Ltd was properly characterized as a civil matter within the jurisdiction of the civil courts because it was ancillary to the main claim for property registration. However, the court found that DAYENU Hotel Ltd had no legal basis to demand reimbursement from BRD Plc for funds paid on behalf of Gasana and Dusabimana or for improvements made to the property, as such claims should be directed to the individuals who benefited, not the bank. The court also found no basis for awarding costs or attorney fees in this appeal, as neither the main nor cross-appeal succeeded.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal by DAYENU Hotel Ltd is dismissed for lack of merit.
  • The cross-appeal by BRD Plc is dismissed for lack of merit.