RE SOCOBICO INDUSTRIES S.A

RE SOCOBICO INDUSTRIES S.A

The Supreme Court found that the applicant's request did not demonstrate any ambiguity or error in the judgment RCAA0011/13/CS, and that the issue of monetary valuation of 'fonds de commerce' was not litigated or decided in the original proceedings. Interpretation cannot be used to introduce new issues or modify the judgment; therefore, the application lacked merit.

Citation
RLR V.2-2016
Parties
Applicant: SOCOBICO Industries S.A; Respondent: ECOBANK Ltd; Respondent: TRUST Industries Ltd; Respondent: Notaire Uwitonze Nasira
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
20 June 2014
Case Number
RS/INTER/CIV0001/14/CS
Procedural Posture
Civil / Supreme Court Interpretation of Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Judgments, Auction of Collateral, Restitution of Commercial Assets
Source Language
en, rw
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Interpretation of Judgments Auction of Collateral Restitution of Commercial Assets

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SOCOBICO Industries S.A

Applicant

ECOBANK Ltd

Respondent

TRUST Industries Ltd

Respondent

Notaire Uwitonze Nasira

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Supreme Court Interpretation of Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to clarification of Supreme Court judgment RCAA0011/13/CS regarding restitution of 'fonds de commerce'
  2. 2 Whether the Supreme Court judgment was ambiguous or unclear as to the value or nature of assets to be returned

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court found that the applicant's request did not demonstrate any ambiguity or error in the judgment RCAA0011/13/CS, and that the issue of monetary valuation of 'fonds de commerce' was not litigated or decided in the original proceedings. Interpretation cannot be used to introduce new issues or modify the judgment; therefore, the application lacked merit.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • No clarification or interpretation granted regarding paragraph 121 of judgment RCAA0011/13/CS