KAMUGWIZA v HASHIM

KAMUGWIZA v HASHIM

The procuration of 09/05/2014 was general and did not expressly or specifically identify the property to be sold, nor did it provide sufficient detail as required by law for acts of disposal. Therefore, Mukuralinda Alain Bernard lacked authority to sell Sakina Hashim's property, rendering the sale agreement and subsequent title transfers null and void.

Citation
RLR V.1-2024
Parties
Applicant: Kamugwiza Phoebe; Respondent: Sakina Hashim; Third Party: Mukuralinda Alain Bernard; Third Party: Famida Hashim
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
20 May 2022
Case Number
RS/INJUST/RC 00008/2020/SC
Procedural Posture
Civil / Supreme Court Review (revision) on Grounds of Injustice
Outcome
Applicant's claim dismissed; sale agreement and title transfer declared void.
Legal Topics
Mandate (procuration), Authority to Sell Property, Validity of Sale Agreements, Compensation for Litigation Costs
Source Language
rw
Civil Law Property Law Mandate (procuration) Authority to Sell Property Validity of Sale Agreements Compensation for Litigation Costs

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kamugwiza Phoebe

Applicant

Sakina Hashim

Respondent

Mukuralinda Alain Bernard

Third Party

Famida Hashim

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil / Supreme Court Review (revision) on Grounds of Injustice

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mukuralinda Alain Bernard had authority to sell Sakina Hashim's property under the procuration of 09/05/2014
  2. 2 Whether the sale agreement between Kamugwiza Phoebe and Mukuralinda Alain Bernard is valid
  3. 3 Entitlement to compensation for litigation costs

Ratio Decidendi

The procuration of 09/05/2014 was general and did not expressly or specifically identify the property to be sold, nor did it provide sufficient detail as required by law for acts of disposal. Therefore, Mukuralinda Alain Bernard lacked authority to sell Sakina Hashim's property, rendering the sale agreement and subsequent title transfers null and void.

Court Disposition

Applicant's claim dismissed; sale agreement and title transfer declared void.

Orders

  • Kamugwiza Phoebe's application for revision is dismissed for lack of merit.
  • Kamugwiza Phoebe is ordered to pay Sakina Hashim and Famida Hashim 800,000 Frw each for legal fees and litigation costs.