Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Rwanda decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Supreme Court held that Rwandan courts had jurisdiction over a Ugandan bank’s claim because the defendants lived in Rwanda and the collateral was in Rwanda.
The Supreme Court held that Rwandan courts had jurisdiction over a cross-border loan dispute because the contract allowed proceedings in other competent courts and the mortgage was in Rwanda.
The Supreme Court held that the Rwandan courts had jurisdiction because the contractual clause selecting the London High Court of Justice was unreasonable and lacked material connection to the dispute or parties. The appellant failed to show that the London court was more appropriate or convenient. The Court further held that the appellant was liable for contractual interest at 12% per annum as agreed, calculated from July 2010 until judgment, and for the principal debt. The cross-appeal for higher interest and additional advocate's fees was only partially granted.
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court upheld Rwandan jurisdiction despite an exclusive London clause, and confirmed contractual interest at 12% per year with adjusted fees.
The Supreme Court held that the London forum selection clause was unenforceable because neither party nor the dispute had a material connection to England, and the clause was unreasonable under the circumstances. Rwandan courts had jurisdiction as the defendant resided in Rwanda and the contract was performed there. DAMCO Tanzania was entitled to the outstanding debt, contractual interest at 12% per annum, and reasonable attorney fees. Great Lakes Cement's counterclaims were dismissed for lack of merit.
Source excerpt
Explore more
