NZAYIKORERA N’ABANDI v SANLAM AG PL c

NZAYIKORERA N’ABANDI v SANLAM AG PL c

The Supreme Court held that compensation for the fatal accident must be determined under the workmen compensation insurance regime, not under the general motor vehicle insurance or Presidential Order No 31/01 of 25/08/2003. The 1,000,000 Frw paid under the workmen compensation insurance was lawful and final. No...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RS/INJUST/RC 00008/2024/SC
Parties
Applicant: Nzayikorera Jeanne, Uwimpundu Marie, Mukashema Mamelithe, Ndengeyingoma Bosco, Tuyishimire Béatrice, Nyirangirimana Béathe, Nyiragasigwa Agnès, Bihoyiki Vestine; Respondent: SANLAM AG Plc; Respondent: CHINA ROAD AND BRIDGE CORPORATION Ltd (CRBC Ltd)
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
17 January 2025
Case Number
RS/INJUST/RC 00008/2024/SC
Procedural Posture
Civil (labour/insurance) / Supreme Court Review of High Court Judgment for Alleged Injustice
Outcome
Application for review dismissed; prior High Court judgment affirmed.
Legal Topics
Workplace Accident, Workmen Compensation Insurance, Mandatory Motor Vehicle Insurance, Employee Benefits, Liability for Workplace Injury
Source Language
rw
Labour Law Insurance Law Tort Law Workplace Accident Workmen Compensation Insurance Mandatory Motor Vehicle Insurance Employee Benefits Liability for Workplace Injury

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nzayikorera Jeanne, Uwimpundu Marie, Mukashema Mamelithe, Ndengeyingoma Bosco, Tuyishimire Béatrice, Nyirangirimana Béathe, Nyiragasigwa Agnès, Bihoyiki Vestine

Applicant

SANLAM AG Plc

Respondent

CHINA ROAD AND BRIDGE CORPORATION Ltd (CRBC Ltd)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil (labour/insurance) / Supreme Court Review of High Court Judgment for Alleged Injustice

  1. 1 Which insurance regime applies to compensation for a fatal workplace accident involving a company vehicle?
  2. 2 Are the applicants entitled to additional compensation beyond the workmen compensation insurance?
  3. 3 Who is liable for compensation: the insurer, the employer, or both?

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that compensation for the fatal accident must be determined under the workmen compensation insurance regime, not under the general motor vehicle insurance or Presidential Order No 31/01 of 25/08/2003. The 1,000,000 Frw paid under the workmen compensation insurance was lawful and final. No further compensation is due from the insurer or employer. The applicants' claim for review on grounds of injustice is unfounded.

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed; prior High Court judgment affirmed.

Orders

  • Applicants to jointly pay SANLAM AG Plc 500,000 Frw and CRBC Ltd 500,000 Frw as legal fees.