GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA v KARANGWA ET AL

GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA v KARANGWA ET AL

The Supreme Court held that third party opposition against its own judgments is expressly prohibited by law, and only case review is permitted as a remedy. The government's application was therefore inadmissible.

Citation
RADA 0001/09/CS
Parties
Applicant: Government of Rwanda; Respondent: Karangwa Eugène; Interested Party: ELECTROGAZ
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
17 September 2010
Case Number
RADA 0001/09/CS
Procedural Posture
Administrative / Application for Third Party Opposition Before Supreme Court
Outcome
application dismissed as inadmissible
Legal Topics
Third Party Opposition, Supreme Court Jurisdiction, Finality of Judgments
Source Language
en, rw
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Third Party Opposition Supreme Court Jurisdiction Finality of Judgments

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

Parties

Government of Rwanda

Applicant

Karangwa Eugène

Respondent

ELECTROGAZ

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Administrative / Application for Third Party Opposition Before Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether third party opposition is admissible against a Supreme Court judgment under Rwandan law

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that third party opposition against its own judgments is expressly prohibited by law, and only case review is permitted as a remedy. The government's application was therefore inadmissible.

Court Disposition

application dismissed as inadmissible

Orders

  • Claim of third party opposition against Supreme Court judgment RADA 0005/08/CS is inadmissible
  • Court fees to be paid by the public treasury