Rwanda Case Law

DP WORLD LOGISTIC Ltd v. RUTETINDA

Court

High Court

Case number

RSOCA00219/2023/HC/KIG

The High Court found that Rutetinda Chris was unlawfully dismissed because no formal performance evaluation was conducted at the end of his probation as required by the employment contract and law. However, damages must be calculated on the net salary, not gross salary, and limited to three months' net salary due to the short duration of employment. No additional compensation for lack of notice was due as the dismissal occurred during the probation period. Legal costs and attorney fees were partially awarded to both parties according to the outcome.

Source excerpt

• Unlawful termination
• Employment contract
• Compensation for unfair dismissal
• Probation period
• Calculation of damages

Read case analysis

TUYISENGE v. HAYTON LTD

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

RS/INJUST/RSOC 00003/2022/SC

The Supreme Court partially allowed review in a labour dispute, refusing unfair-dismissal damages but ordering Hayton Ltd to pay social security contributions and fees.

• Employment contract
• Casual workers
• Unwritten contracts
• Social security contributions
• Wrongful dismissal
• Procedural and counsel fees

Read case analysis

DUSHIMIMANA v ASA MICROFINANCE Plc

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RS/INJUST/RSOC 00001/2024/CA

ASA MICROFINANCE Plc unlawfully terminated Dushimimana Jonathan’s fixed-term employment contract without notice and without serious misconduct, contrary to the applicable labour law. The respondent failed to provide notice or pay in lieu thereof, and the applicant is entitled to damages equal to the net salary for the remaining contract period, notice pay, and damages for lack of work certificate. Claims for overtime, severance, and additional damages were denied due to lack of evidence or statutory basis.

Source excerpt

• Unlawful dismissal
• Notice of termination
• Employment contract
• Damages for wrongful termination
• Final payment
• Legal costs

Read case analysis

NISHIMWE vs. HORIZON CONSTRUCTION Ltd

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RS/INJUST/RSOC 00019/2022/CA

The Court of Appeal held Nishimwe Françoise was a casual worker, not a permanent employee, but ordered Horizon Construction Ltd to pay unpaid social security contributions and costs.

• Employment contract
• Casual employment
• Social security contributions
• Unlawful dismissal
• Compensation
• Legal costs

Read case analysis

KAYITABA vs. WOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RS/INJUST/RSOC 00003/2022/CA

The applicant was not dismissed for gross misconduct as defined by law; the employer failed to prove the alleged misconduct met the legal threshold and did not follow proper procedures. Therefore, the dismissal was unlawful, entitling the applicant to damages, severance, notice pay, and partial salary for February 2012.

Source excerpt

• Unlawful dismissal
• Summary dismissal
• Severance pay
• Notice period
• Employment contract
• Damages for wrongful termination

Read case analysis

GAHIRIMA vs. KIVU MARINA BAY Ltd

Court

High Court

Case number

RSOCA 00005/2023/HC/RSZ

The High Court held that transport and communication allowances form part of salary for limitation purposes, upheld prescription of older claims, and reversed the lower court’s awards.

• Employment contract
• Wages and allowances
• Limitation period (prescription)
• Appeal procedure
• Damages and costs
• Labour-law

Read case analysis

MUHUTUKAZI v. MEGERWA S.A

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

RSOCAA 0019/12/CS

The dismissal of Muhutukazi was based on a legitimate motive (removal of a parcel without authorization) and she was given an opportunity to defend herself in writing, as required by law at the time. Therefore, her dismissal was not unfair and she is not entitled to damages for unfair dismissal. Claims for extra hours and annual gratification were denied due to lack of authorization and not meeting eligibility criteria. Vested rights were not awarded as her salary was increased under a new contract. She was awarded compensation for acting as DAF and reimbursement of Social Security deduction,…

Source excerpt

• Termination of employment
• Unfair dismissal
• Employment contract
• Compensation for extra hours
• Annual gratification
• Vested rights

Read case analysis

HAVUGIMANA vs. SONARWA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY Ltd

Court

High Court

Case number

RSOCA 00035/2022/HC/KIG

The court found that selling insurance on credit, while contrary to Central Bank regulations, was not classified as gross misconduct under the relevant Ministerial Order. SONARWA tolerated the conduct for years and did not treat it as gross misconduct until dismissal. Therefore, Havugimana's dismissal was unlawful, entitling him to damages and costs.

Source excerpt

• Unlawful termination
• Gross misconduct
• Employment contract
• Labour procedure
• Damages for wrongful dismissal

Read case analysis

DIOSEZE GATOLIKA YA CYANGUGU vs. HABIYAREMYE

Court

High Court

Case number

RSOCA 00004/2022/HC/RSZ

The court found that the reasons advanced by the employer for terminating the employment contract—namely, the employee's communication of staff concerns and acting as a representative—did not constitute valid grounds for dismissal under Rwandan labour law. The employee's actions were within his legal rights, and the employer failed to demonstrate any legal or factual basis for summary dismissal. Therefore, the termination was unlawful and the damages awarded were justified.

Source excerpt

• Unlawful termination
• Employment contract
• Damages for wrongful dismissal
• Employee representation
• Labour procedure

Read case analysis

UWINGABIYE v EAR DIYOSEZE YA SHYIRA

Court

High Court

Case number

RSOCA 00014/2022/HC/MUS

The High Court held that Uwingabiye Monique was unlawfully dismissed for economic reasons without the required procedure and awarded compensation and repayment of unlawful deductions.

• Unlawful termination
• Employment contract
• Severance pay
• Salary deductions
• Procedural fairness in dismissal
• Unlawful-dismissal

Read case analysis