The Court of Appeal allowed Urugaga rw’Abavoka to withdraw its appeal without the respondent’s consent and awarded Mhayimana Isaïe legal fees and costs.
Acquittal in a criminal case does not preclude disciplinary action for the same facts under administrative law; procedural irregularities in notification of dismissal do not invalidate the dismissal or entitle to damages absent proof of prejudice; the applicant failed to prove legal or factual grounds for reinstatement or damages; the appeal is dismissed and the applicant is ordered to pay costs.
Source excerpt
Dismissal of public employees
Disciplinary proceedings
Effect of acquittal in criminal court on administrative sanctions
The disciplinary decision against Mhayimana IsaĂŻe was taken without the legally required quorum of 2/3 of the Disciplinary Committee's 11 members, rendering the decision invalid. The President of the Bar Association had capacity to seize the Committee, and the prescription period was observed. No sufficient evidence was provided for additional damages beyond refund of fees.
The disciplinary decision against Me Mhayimana IsaĂŻe was invalid because it was made without the legally required quorum of 2/3 of the 11-member Disciplinary Committee. The Committee's composition and procedure did not comply with statutory requirements, rendering the sanction void. The applicant is not entitled to additional compensation for moral prejudice as the annulment of the decision suffices, absent proof of distinct harm.