The Court of Appeal held that refusing to sign a modified employment contract did not by itself justify dismissal, and awarded compensation for unlawful termination.
The court found that the applicant's dismissal was unlawful because the employer relied solely on unmet performance targets without considering external factors (notably COVID-19) or providing adequate support, and failed to demonstrate that the targets were realistically achievable under the circumstances. The applicant is entitled to damages and reimbursement of legal costs.
The Supreme Court held that the immovable property was validly mortgaged and registered, rejected the review for injustice, upheld prior judgments, and awarded costs to Urwego Finance.
Musafiri Placide filed his notice of appeal within the statutory period but failed to submit the required grounds of appeal within that period. The subsequent detailed submissions by his counsel, filed more than three years later, were not admissible as they were not timely and no valid justification for the delay was established. The COVID-19 pandemic did not constitute a sufficient obstacle to timely filing. Therefore, the High Court correctly rejected the late submissions, and the conviction and sentence remain in force.
Select Kalaos Ltd failed to provide sufficient evidence for its claims against Mutavunika Arcade; Mutavunika Arcade is only entitled to late payment interest for the contract period, not beyond. Both parties' claims for additional damages are unsupported by evidence. The prior High Commercial Court judgment was set aside due to procedural unfairness, but the Commercial Court's substantive decision stands.
The Court of Appeal upheld annulment of an auction sale because the property valuation was outdated and the auction notice was published in the wrong newspaper.
The Court of Appeal upheld cancellation of a mortgage auction because the valuation was outdated and the auction was advertised in a different newspaper than the terms required.
The Court of Appeal dismissed Ecobank and the receiver’s appeal, upholding annulment of an auction based on an outdated valuation and a changed publication notice.
The High Court held that demolition was unlawful where the applicant had already been fined for unauthorized construction and no new violation had occurred.
The Supreme Court dismissed a review-for-injustice application by former workers of BGM Rwanda, finding they failed to prove continuous employment or a fixed salary.