Rwanda Case Law

ENTREPRISE D’ADDUCTION D’EAU ET DE CONSTRUCTION v AKARERE KA GATSIBO

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RCOMAA 00053/2024/CA

EADECO failed to complete the contracted works within the agreed period, with only 34% of the works completed by the contractual deadline and 50% after additional time. The delays were attributable to EADECO, not to the respondent's conduct. The evidence provided by EADECO for compensation claims was insufficient and not independently verified. The contract and law entitled Akarere ka Gatsibo to terminate the contract for delay. Therefore, the appeal lacked merit and was dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Breach of contract
• Termination of contract
• Public procurement contracts
• Damages and compensation
• Procedural law

Read case analysis

SORAS AG v IKIGO CY’IGIHUGU GISHINZWE GUTEZA IMBERE IBYOHEREZWA MU MAHANGA BIKOMOKA KU BUHINZI N’UBWOROZI (NAEB)

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RCOMAA 00037/2019/CA (

SORAS AG Ltd is liable to pay the outstanding advance payment guarantee to NAEB because the guarantee was unconditional and payable upon first demand, irrespective of whether the advance was used in the works. The advance payment is not considered payment for completed work but must be reimbursed as per the contract and procurement law. The surety's obligation is not extinguished by the use of the advance in the works. NAEB is entitled to partial litigation costs but not to punitive damages for being drawn into litigation.

Source excerpt

• Advance payment guarantee
• Surety obligations
• Public procurement contracts
• Contract interpretation
• Damages and costs

Read case analysis

SORAS AG v. NAEB

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RCOMAA 00037/2019/CA

The Court of Appeal held that SORAS AG Ltd had to pay the outstanding advance-payment guarantee to NAEB on first demand, regardless of work already performed.

• Advance payment guarantee
• Surety obligations
• Public procurement contracts
• Contract interpretation
• Liability of guarantor
• Advance-payment-guarantee

Read case analysis

SORAS AG v. NAEB

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RCOMAA 00037/2019/CA

SORAS AG Ltd is unconditionally obligated under the advance payment guarantee to pay the outstanding amount upon first demand by NAEB, regardless of the value of works executed or the use of the advance, as per the terms of the guarantee and applicable law. The advance payment is not considered payment for completed works but must be reimbursed according to the contract and procurement law.

Source excerpt

• Advance payment guarantee
• Contractual obligations
• Suretyship
• Public procurement contracts

Read case analysis

SORAS AG v. IKIGO CY’IGIHUGU GISHINZWE GUTEZA IMBERE IBYOHEREZWA MU MAHANGA BIKOMOKA KU BUHINZI N’UBWOROZI (NAEB)

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RCOMAA 00037/2019/CA

The surety (SORAS AG Ltd) is unconditionally liable to pay the outstanding advance payment guarantee to NAEB upon first demand, as per the terms of the guarantee and procurement law, regardless of whether the advance is reflected in the works performed. The guarantee is not limited to cases of misuse but covers any failure to reimburse the advance as contractually required. The surety cannot raise defences based on the underlying contract unless exceptions are definitively established.

Source excerpt

• Advance payment guarantee
• Contractual obligations
• Public procurement contracts
• Surety liability
• Damages and costs

Read case analysis

IGIP_MBH_INGÉNIEURS-CONSEILS_v_GOVERNMENT_OF_RWANDA__MININFRA_

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

RCOMAA 00012/2017/SC

The Supreme Court dismissed a contractor’s appeal for unpaid invoices and refund of works performance security, holding that approved completion reports and signed invoices were required.

• Works performance security
• Contractual obligations
• Evidence in civil procedure
• Public procurement contracts
• Refund of security deposits
• Contract-law

Read case analysis