UBURIYEMUYE v. HOME BASKET SACCO KIMIRONKO

UBURIYEMUYE v. HOME BASKET SACCO KIMIRONKO

The Supreme Court found that the Court of Appeal exceeded its mandate by ruling on the merits of the case without hearing arguments beyond the preliminary objections, violating Article 11 of Law No. 22/2018. The judgment of the Court of Appeal is set aside, and the case is remitted for substantive hearing on the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RS/INJUST/RCOM 00006/2020/SC
Parties
Applicant: UBURIYEMUYE Jean Damascène; Respondent: HOME BASKET SACCO Kimironko; Other: RUGEMA ZIGA Jean Claude
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
8 October 2021
Case Number
RS/INJUST/RCOM 00006/2020/SC
Procedural Posture
Commercial Loan Dispute; Application for Review on Grounds of Injustice / Supreme Court Review of Court of Appeal Decision
Outcome
Application for review allowed; Court of Appeal judgment set aside; case remitted for substantive hearing.
Legal Topics
Review of Judgments, Loan Agreements, Judicial Powers, Execution of Judgments, Auction Procedures
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Review of Judgments Loan Agreements Judicial Powers Execution of Judgments Auction Procedures

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

UBURIYEMUYE Jean Damascène

Applicant

HOME BASKET SACCO Kimironko

Respondent

RUGEMA ZIGA Jean Claude

Other

Procedural Posture

Commercial Loan Dispute; Application for Review on Grounds of Injustice / Supreme Court Review of Court of Appeal Decision

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal decided on the merits without hearing arguments beyond preliminary objections
  2. 2 Whether the auction of the applicant's property was conducted lawfully
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was denied the right to be heard on the merits

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court found that the Court of Appeal exceeded its mandate by ruling on the merits of the case without hearing arguments beyond the preliminary objections, violating Article 11 of Law No. 22/2018. The judgment of the Court of Appeal is set aside, and the case is remitted for substantive hearing on the applicant's grounds of appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for review allowed; Court of Appeal judgment set aside; case remitted for substantive hearing.

Orders

  • The judgment RCOMA 00004/2019/CA of the Court of Appeal dated 15/05/2020 is set aside.
  • The case is remitted to the Court of Appeal for hearing on the substantive grounds of appeal raised by UBURIYEMUYE Jean Damascène.