LETA Y’U RWANDA v. KARANGWA N’ABANDI

LETA Y’U RWANDA v. KARANGWA N’ABANDI

The Supreme Court held that Article 84 of Organic Law No. 01/2004 prohibits any challenge to its judgments except for revision based on new facts, and this procedural bar applies regardless of whether the state was represented in the original proceedings. Therefore, the state’s motion to set aside the judgment was inadmissible.

Citation
RADA 0001/09/CS
Parties
Applicant: Leta y’u 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 / Motion to Set Aside Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
application dismissed as inadmissible
Legal Topics
Finality of Supreme Court Judgments, Procedural Bars, Standing to Challenge Judgments
Source Language
rw, en
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Finality of Supreme Court Judgments Procedural Bars Standing to Challenge 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

Leta y’u Rwanda

Applicant

Karangwa Eugène

Respondent

ELECTROGAZ

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Administrative / Motion to Set Aside Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a party may challenge or set aside a judgment rendered by the Supreme Court of Rwanda through a motion to set aside (gutambamira)
  2. 2 Interpretation of Article 84 of Organic Law No. 01/2004 regarding the powers and procedures of the Supreme Court

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that Article 84 of Organic Law No. 01/2004 prohibits any challenge to its judgments except for revision based on new facts, and this procedural bar applies regardless of whether the state was represented in the original proceedings. Therefore, the state’s motion to set aside the judgment was inadmissible.

Court Disposition

application dismissed as inadmissible

Orders

  • The motion to set aside Supreme Court judgment RADA 0005/08/CS is dismissed as inadmissible.
  • Costs are to be borne by the state.