Kalisa v. Cogear

Kalisa v. Cogear

Insurance coverage had not commenced at the time of the theft as the goods were still in the warehouse at Dar es Salaam; thus, Cogear is not liable for the stolen goods. Compensation for damaged goods is limited to their actual value, not the insured value, as there was no evidence of fraud or deceit.

Citation
RCOMA 0079/09/CS
Parties
Appellant: Kalisa Appolo; Respondent: Cogear
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
12 November 2011
Case Number
RCOMA 0079/09/CS
Procedural Posture
Commercial Insurance Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; lower court judgment affirmed.
Legal Topics
Commencement of Insurance Coverage, Valuation of Insured Goods, Over Insurance, Interpretation of Insurance Contracts
Source Language
rw, en

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kalisa Appolo

Appellant

Cogear

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Commercial Insurance Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

  1. 1 When does insurance coverage for goods in transit commence under the contract?
  2. 2 Is the insurer liable for goods stolen before the commencement of coverage?
  3. 3 Should compensation be based on the insured value or the actual value of the goods?

Ratio Decidendi

Insurance coverage had not commenced at the time of the theft as the goods were still in the warehouse at Dar es Salaam; thus, Cogear is not liable for the stolen goods. Compensation for damaged goods is limited to their actual value, not the insured value, as there was no evidence of fraud or deceit.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; lower court judgment affirmed.

Orders

  • Kalisa Appolo to pay court costs of 21,300 Rwfrs within eight days or face enforcement.