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 Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to hear a second appeal in business reorganization matters where the subject matter cannot be valued in monetary terms. The debts owed or claimed are not the subject of the proceedings and cannot be used to establish jurisdiction. Therefore, the second appeal is inadmissible.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal dismissed a commercial appeal over a mortgaged house auction, held the intervener had no admissible new claim, and upheld cost orders.
The Court of Appeal held that Nzamukosha Sylvie had a direct and personal interest to intervene but her claims were new and inadmissible at the appellate stage. The court found that the statutory suspension of creditor enforcement under insolvency law only applies if a liquidation order is made within six months; otherwise, creditors regain enforcement rights. Since no liquidation order was made within the statutory period, the auction was lawful. The appeal by Vintages Wines and Liquors Ltd lacked merit and was dismissed. Legal costs were awarded to the respondents.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction over appeals where the subject matter is not monetarily quantifiable, such as company reorganization proceedings, regardless of the underlying debt amounts. The appeal is not admitted as it does not meet the jurisdictional requirements.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal stayed a commercial appeal after WAP Ltd filed for insolvency, holding that unsecured claims are suspended from the filing date.
The Commercial High Court held that filing an insolvency petition does not itself suspend execution; only a court decision commencing insolvency proceedings does.
The Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction over a second appeal where the subject matter is not capable of being valued in monetary terms, as the dispute was about the authority to sell collateral (liquidator vs receiver), not the value of the collateral itself. Therefore, the appeal was not admissible.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal dismissed FARAJA Hotel Ltd’s second appeal after finding the dispute could not be valued at the 75,000,000 Frw jurisdictional threshold.
The court found that Faraja Hotel Ltd was severely insolvent, with no credible evidence of new investment or capital injection, and that the contracts presented were merely service agreements, not evidence of recovery. The appointment of the administrator was not shown to be unlawful. Therefore, the business recovery process could not be approved and the prior judgment was set aside.
Source excerpt
Once insolvency proceedings are initiated and confirmed by court, no asset of the insolvent company—including those given as collateral—may be separated and sold before the distribution plan for creditors is approved, regardless of the existence of security interests. The appeal by BRD Ltd lacks merit as the law mandates collective satisfaction of creditors' claims through the liquidation process.
Source excerpt
Explore more
