NAYANDI v. COGEBANQUE Ltd

NAYANDI failed to prove actual harm resulting from COGEBANQUE's miscalculation, as his property was auctioned according to the loan agreement and he still acknowledges an outstanding debt. Sureties not proven to be due are not to be treated as debt. Both parties share expert fees as each prevailed on some issues.

Citation: RCOMA 0010/14/CS
Parties: Applicant: NAYANDI Abraham; Respondent: COGEBANQUE Ltd
Court: Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Rwanda
Judgment Date: 20 November 2015
Case Number: RCOMA 0010/14/CS
Procedural Posture: Commercial Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome: Appeal partly allowed; both parties to share expert and court costs; NAYANDI to pay principal debt.
Legal Topics: Damages, Bank Loan Calculation, Suretyship, Commissions, Appeal Procedure
Source Language: rw, en

Contract Law Banking Law Damages Bank Loan Calculation Suretyship Commissions Appeal Procedure

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5

Parties

NAYANDI Abraham

Applicant

COGEBANQUE Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Commercial Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether COGEBANQUE miscalculated the debt owed by NAYANDI and if such miscalculation entitles NAYANDI to damages
2 Whether sureties (cautions) and commissions should be considered as part of the debt owed
3 Responsibility for expert fees and court costs

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal partly allowed; both parties to share expert and court costs; NAYANDI to pay principal debt.

Orders

NAYANDI Abraham to pay COGEBANQUE 255,401,906 Frw as outstanding debt.
NAYANDI Abraham and COGEBANQUE to each pay 2,950,000 Frw towards expert fees (total 5,900,000 Frw).