UBUZIMA POLYCLINIC Ltd v. SGB FUND RWANDA

UBUZIMA POLYCLINIC Ltd v. SGB FUND RWANDA

The Court of Appeal found that both the Commercial Court and the High Commercial Court decided the case on the same grounds, upholding the validity of the loan agreements and the debt calculation. Therefore, under Article 52(3) of Law No. 30/2018, a second appeal is inadmissible. The objection to jurisdiction raised...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RCOMAA 00077/2024/CA
Parties
Appellant: UBUZIMA POLYCLINIC Ltd; Respondent: SGB FUND RWANDA
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
30 October 2025
Case Number
RCOMAA 00077/2024/CA
Procedural Posture
Commercial Appeal / Court of Appeal Ruling on Jurisdictional Objection
Outcome
Second appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; costs and attorney fees awarded to respondent.
Legal Topics
Loan Agreements, Jurisdiction, Appeals, Contract Enforcement, Costs and Attorney Fees
Source Language
rw
Commercial Law Civil Procedure Loan Agreements Jurisdiction Appeals Contract Enforcement Costs and Attorney Fees

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

UBUZIMA POLYCLINIC Ltd

Appellant

SGB FUND RWANDA

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Commercial Appeal / Court of Appeal Ruling on Jurisdictional Objection

  1. 1 Whether the second appeal by UBUZIMA Polyclinic Ltd is within the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal under Article 52(3) of Law No. 30/2018; Whether the grounds for defeat in the lower courts were the same, thus barring a second appeal; Whether SGB FUND RWANDA is entitled to costs and attorney fees.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal found that both the Commercial Court and the High Commercial Court decided the case on the same grounds, upholding the validity of the loan agreements and the debt calculation. Therefore, under Article 52(3) of Law No. 30/2018, a second appeal is inadmissible. The objection to jurisdiction raised by SGB FUND RWANDA was upheld, and the second appeal was dismissed. Costs and attorney fees were awarded to SGB FUND RWANDA.

Court Disposition

Second appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; costs and attorney fees awarded to respondent.

Orders

  • Objection to jurisdiction by SGB FUND RWANDA upheld.
  • Second appeal by UBUZIMA Polyclinic Ltd not admitted.