The Supreme Court held that signed delivery or work sheets can prove a contract even without a formal written agreement, and dismissed PMS Ltd’s review claim.
The Supreme Court held that while the applicable law (Article 78 of Law No. 12/2007) prescribes 1% daily interest for late payment of public procurement guarantees, the resulting sum (639,923,932 Frw) was manifestly excessive compared to the principal (19,935,235 Frw) and the actual loss. The Court exercised its discretion to reduce the interest to an amount equal to the guarantee, preventing unjust enrichment and aligning with principles of proportionality and fairness.
The Court of Appeal held that the signed 12/12/2013 contract fixed the bale price at USD 450, found CHAPA KAZI Ltd had overpaid, and dismissed SOMEX S.A.’s appeal.
The High Court held Dalbit Petroleum Kenya liable with its Kigali subsidiary for the loan debt, awarded contractual interest, and rejected liability of third parties.
SINFOTEC Sarl failed to prove force majeure for the 12-day delay; thus, OCIR-THE was entitled to deduct penalties for that period. However, OCIR-THE was not entitled to set-off amounts owed by a different company (E.I.S.) against SINFOTEC Sarl. SINFOTEC Sarl is entitled to damages for late payment on the wrongfully withheld amount, calculated at 0.1% per day for 1,753 days, plus reasonable attorney fees and costs. Claims for additional damages based on tort or for bank charges were rejected as not contractually or legally justified.
The Supreme Court held that BCR had no right to reverse funds already credited on a cleared cheque and ordered repayment, interest, and reduced legal fees.