Rwanda Case Law

PRIME INSURANCE COMPANY Ltd v SHUMBUSHO

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

RS/INJUST/RC00027/2024/SC

Shumbusho Dan complied with statutory requirements by submitting a complete dossier including the police accident report and seeking settlement in good faith. Prime Insurance Company Ltd failed to demonstrate procedural irregularity or lack of evidence. Damages were correctly calculated based on Supreme Court precedent for professional motorcycle taxi drivers. The request for review based on alleged injustice was unfounded.

Source excerpt

• Motor vehicle accident compensation
• Procedural requirements for claims
• Quantification of damages
• Burden of proof

Read case analysis

NZEYIMANA v. EBENEZER MIXED FARMING AND GENERAL MERCHANDISE LTD

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RS/INJUST/RCOM 00013/2024/CA

The Court of Appeal partly granted review for injustice, reducing the amounts payable for maize and bean seeds and declining legal costs and attorney fees.

• Burden of proof
• Contract performance
• Evidence in civil proceedings
• Quantification of damages
• Burden-of-proof
• Contract-performance

Read case analysis

NYABYENDA N’UNDI v. BONANZA INVESTMENT COMPANY LTD

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RCOMAA 00087/2024/CA

The Court of Appeal held that the second appeal was not admissible because no lower court had awarded damages of at least 75,000,000 Frw.

• Jurisdiction of appellate courts
• Quantification of damages
• Contract enforcement
• Costs and attorney fees
• Appellate-jurisdiction
• Commercial-appeal

Read case analysis

AKIMANIZANYE N’ABANDI v NICE EGGS COMPANY Ltd N’UNDI

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RS/INJUST/RSOC 00013/2022/CA

The Court of Appeal held that only the widow and children could pursue review for injustice, and it quantified workplace accident damages using general principles.

• Workplace accident compensation
• Standing to sue
• Quantification of damages
• Procedural bars to review
• Insurance liability
• Workplace-accident-compensation

Read case analysis

SANLAM v KARANGWAYIRE NABANDI

Court

High Court

Case number

RCA 00195/2022/HC/KIG

The High Court upheld an award of dependency and funeral damages after finding that Karangwayire Caritas proved she was supported by the deceased.

• Compensation for fatal accident
• Burden of proof for dependency
• Quantification of damages
• Funeral expenses
• Dependency-damages
• Funeral-expenses

Read case analysis

MANIRARORA v RWANDA RUDNIKI LTD

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RS/INJUST/RC 00013/2021/CA

Rwanda Rudniki Ltd, as owner and operator of the mine, is strictly liable for damages caused to Manirarora Jean de Dieu by the mining accident, regardless of fault, under Article 260 of the Civil Code. The absence of specific legislation on mining accident compensation means damages are to be determined by general legal principles, not by the Presidential Decree for road accidents or unpublished technical standards. The insurer, SANLAM AG Plc, is only liable up to the contractual limit. The applicant's choice to sue the employer directly is valid.

Source excerpt

• Employer liability
• Workplace accident compensation
• Direct vs. personal action against insurer/employer
• Quantification of damages
• Application of general vs. special law

Read case analysis