RUTAYISIRE v. RWANDA CORRECTIONAL SERVICES (RCS)
- Citation
- RAD 0017/15/HC/KIG
- Status
- Administrative
- Jurisdiction
- Rwanda
- Court
- High Court
- Decision
- 26 January 2016
- Posture
- Civil / Withdrawal Before Judgment
- Case number
- RAD 0017/15/HC/KIG
More details
- Court
- High Court
- Decision
- 26 January 2016
- Posture
- Civil / Withdrawal Before Judgment
- Case number
- RAD 0017/15/HC/KIG
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The applicant is permitted to withdraw the case as he has no further interest, and the law allows withdrawal at any stage by written or verbal declaration.
Court disposition
claim withdrawn
Orders
- The claim is withdrawn.
- Court fees to be paid by the public treasury.
02
Material facts
Parties
Rutayisire Alexis
Applicant Counsel: Cyubahiro FiatRwanda Correctional Services (RCS)
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Civil / Withdrawal Before Judgment
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
Whether the applicant may withdraw the case at this stage of proceedings
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Applicant withdrew the case as he received a satisfactory response from the Commissioner General of RCS regarding payment, as communicated in the letter of 25 January 2016.
- Respondent
- Commissioner General of RCS informed the Court they are going to pay Rutayisire Alexis.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Law N° 21/2012 of 14/06/2012, article 131
Withdrawal from a case may be made and accepted at any stage of the proceedings by a simple written declaration, signed by the interested party or his/her counsel and the notice of which is served to the other party. Withdrawal may also be made verbally before the court.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The applicant is permitted to withdraw the case as he has no further interest, and the law allows withdrawal at any stage by written or verbal declaration.
Court disposition
claim withdrawn
- The claim is withdrawn.
- Court fees to be paid by the public treasury.
Source and reliance status
High Court · 26 January 2016
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
High Court
Administrative· 26 January 2016
RUTAYISIRE v. RWANDA CORRECTIONAL SERVICES (RCS)
- Source: Amategeko - Section: Decisions (Judgements) - Date: 2016-01-26 - Case/document no.: RAD 0017/15/HC/KIG - Collection: High Court
Text
Page 1
RUTAYISIRE v. RWANDA CORRECTIONAL SERVICES (RCS) [Rwanda HIGH COURT – RAD 0017/15/HC/KIG (Kabagambe, P.J.) January 26, 2016] Civil procedure – Withdrawing from the case – Acceptance from withdrawing from the case – The fact that the party to case has no interest to follow the case – Withdrawal from a case may be made and accepted at any stage of the proceedings by a simple written declaration, signed by the interested party or his/her counsel and the notice of which is served to the other party – Law N° 21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article 131. Facts : Rutayisire filed a claim for requesting to force the administrative authority who refused to execute of the judgment RADA 0016/15/HC/KIG; RADA 0026/14/HC/KIG together with RAD 082/13/TGI/NYGE. On the hearing day Rutayisire s informed the Court that he withdraws from the case because what he sued for he got an answer for it in the letter of 25 January 2016 of Commissioner General of RCS which he wrote to the Court in informing the way for paying him. Held : The fact that the party to case has no interest to follow the case and he/she requests to the Court he allows to withdraw from the case because withdrawing from a case may be made and accepted at any stage of the proceedings by a simple written declaration, signed by the interested party or his/her counsel and the
notice of which is served to the other party. Withdrawal may also be made verbally before the court. The claim is withdrawn; With the court fees to the public treasury. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Law N° 21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, article131 No case referred to. Judgment I. BRIEF BACKGROUND OF THE CASE [1] Rutayisire Alexis filed a claim for requesting to force the administrative authority who refused to execute of the judgment RADA 0016/15/HC/KIG rendered on 16 September 2015 and RADA 0026/14/HC/KIG rendered on 05 January 2015 together with RAD 082/13/TGI/NYGE
Page 2
rendered by the Intermediate Court on 31 March 2014. But on the hearing day Rutayisire Alexis informed the Court that he withdraws from the case. [2] The issue to be examined in this judgment: Concerning the withdrawing from the case of Rutayisire Alexis II. ANALYSIS OF THE LEGAL ISSUES Concerning the withdrawing from the case of Rutayisire Alexis [3] Counsel Cyubahiro Fiat informed the Court that the Commissioner General of RCS wrote to the Court for informing it that they are going to pay Rutayisire Alexis. [4] Rutayisire Alexis informed the Court that he withdraws from the case because what he sued for he got an answer for it in the letter of 25 January 2016 of Commissioner General of RCS which he wrote to the Court in informing the way for paying him. [5] According to the article 131 of Law N° 21/2012 of 14/06/2012 relating to the civil, commercial, labour and administrative procedure, provides for that Withdrawal from a case may be made and accepted at any stage of the proceedings by a simple written declaration, signed by the interested party or his/her counsel and the notice of which is served to the other party. Withdrawal may also be made verbally before the court, therefore he is allowed to withdraw from the case as he requested. III. DECISION OF THE COURT [6] The Court holds that Rutayisire Alexis withdraws from the case [7] The Court orders that the court fees are on the side of public treasury
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.