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 held that mortgage-auction notices were governed by special instructions, not general procedure, and upheld the auction on POSADA PLUS Ltd’s property.
The Supreme Court held that the immovable property was validly mortgaged and registered, rejected the review for injustice, upheld prior judgments, and awarded costs to Urwego Finance.
The Supreme Court held that a mortgage securing one identified debt could not be extended to later loans without clear contractual identification and registration.
SOCOBICO Industries S.A. failed to prove that any of its business assets are currently possessed by ROBA Industries Ltd or were transferred through the chain of transactions originating from the auction. The right of follow-up applies only if the assets can be specifically identified, which SOCOBICO did not do. Therefore, no order for return of assets can be made against ROBA Industries Ltd. However, to clarify the composition and value of business assets to be returned by Trust Industries Ltd as per the 2013 Supreme Court judgment, an accounting expert must be appointed to identify and value…
Source excerpt
The Court held that once Merez Petroleum Ltd fully repaid the debt secured by the mortgage, Addax Energy SA was legally obliged to return the mortgaged property, regardless of the late payment or prior foreclosure steps. The counterclaim by Addax Energy SA, based on a separate transport agreement, was inadmissible as it was unrelated to the main claim. Costs and attorney fees were awarded to Merez Petroleum Ltd, not Addax Energy SA.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that Bank of Kigali lawfully acquired and sold the collateral to SODAR Ltd, dismissed the appeal, and upheld costs.
The Supreme Court held that respondents could not unilaterally remove mortgaged property without the creditor’s written consent, but declined to order payment of an unspecified residual debt.
The court held that since the property was under security with the bank and the sale to Manishimwe was authorized and conducted lawfully, the encumbrance placed by Nsengiyumva must be removed as Gatete no longer had rights over the property. The property must be registered in Manishimwe's name as per the valid sale and applicable laws.
Source excerpt
The property was under mortgage to the bank, which authorized its sale to Manishimwe Francois, who paid the debt. Once sold and the debt settled, Gatete Clement no longer had rights over the property for Nsengiyumva Thierry to encumber. The sale and transfer were legally executed, so the encumbrance must be removed and the property registered to Manishimwe Francois.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that Mukarugwiza Ruth’s retrial claim on grounds of injustice was justified and that auction proceeds must first satisfy her loan.
Explore more
