The Supreme Court held that compensation for a fatal workplace accident in a company vehicle was governed by workmen compensation insurance, not general motor vehicle insurance.
Where an employee suffers a workplace accident and the insurance payout is insufficient to cover the actual damages, the employer is liable to pay the difference, and compensation is to be determined based on evidence and the court's discretion, not by formulas applicable to road accidents.
Where insurance indemnity is insufficient to compensate for workplace injury, the employer is liable for the difference based on evidence and judicial discretion, restoring the employee to the position they would have been in absent the injury.
Rwanda Rudniki Ltd, as owner and operator of the mine, is strictly liable for damages caused by the mine to its employee, regardless of fault, under Article 260 of the Civil Code. Compensation must be calculated using judicial discretion and general principles, not by analogy to the presidential decree for vehicle accidents, nor by unpublished regulatory standards. The insurer SANLAM AG Plc is liable only up to the contractual limit (40% of 1,000,000 Frw plus medical expenses). Legal fees and procedural costs are awarded to the applicant, not to the respondent or insurer.
The Supreme Court held that workplace-accident compensation may cover both physical and mental disability, and adjusted monthly compensation and damages.