UBURIYEMUYE v HOME BASKET SACCO KIMIRONKO ET AL

UBURIYEMUYE v HOME BASKET SACCO KIMIRONKO ET AL

HOME BASKET SACCO Kimironko had the right to make a third party opposition as it was not a party to the original case and had a legal interest. The Commercial High Court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case concerning auction formalities, which are reserved for the Commercial Court or Primary Court. Damages claimed by Uburiyemuye were denied as he lost the case; procedural and counsel fees were awarded to the respondents.

Citation
RS/INJUST/RCOM 00006/2020/SC,
Parties
Applicant: Uburiyemuye Jean Damascène; Respondent: HOME BASKET SACCO Kimironko; Respondent: Rugema Ziga Jean Claude
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
18 March 2022
Case Number
RS/INJUST/RCOM 00006/2020/SC,
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Supreme Court Review of Court of Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment of Commercial High Court sustained; applicant ordered to pay procedural and counsel fees to respondents.
Legal Topics
Agency Contract, Third Party Opposition, Judgment Execution, Seizure Procedure, Jurisdiction, Damages
Source Language
en, rw
Commercial Law Civil Procedure Agency Contract Third Party Opposition Judgment Execution Seizure Procedure Jurisdiction Damages

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Uburiyemuye Jean Damascène

Applicant

HOME BASKET SACCO Kimironko

Respondent

Rugema Ziga Jean Claude

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Commercial / Supreme Court Review of Court of Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether HOME BASKET SACCO Kimironko had a right to oppose the judgment RCOM 00021/2017/CHC/HCC via third party opposition
  2. 2 Whether the Commercial High Court had jurisdiction to hear the case RCOM 00021/2017/CHC/HCC
  3. 3 Whether damages claimed by parties are justified

Ratio Decidendi

HOME BASKET SACCO Kimironko had the right to make a third party opposition as it was not a party to the original case and had a legal interest. The Commercial High Court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case concerning auction formalities, which are reserved for the Commercial Court or Primary Court. Damages claimed by Uburiyemuye were denied as he lost the case; procedural and counsel fees were awarded to the respondents.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment of Commercial High Court sustained; applicant ordered to pay procedural and counsel fees to respondents.

Orders

  • Claim by Uburiyemuye Jean Damascène dismissed as lacking merit.
  • Judgment RCOM 00001/2018/CHC/HCC of 05/02/2019 sustained.