Sign in
Rwanda Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Rwanda Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
1 court collection
Last checked

Rwanda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Company law RLR V.2-2019

MUREKATETE v. RWANDA REVENUE AUTHORITY (RRA)

The Supreme Court held that a caveat on a shareholder’s personal property for company tax debts was unlawful without a court ruling on personal liability.

  • Piercing the corporate veil
  • Shareholder liability
  • Provisional measures
  • Counterclaims
  • Tax enforcement
  • Piercing-the-corporate-veil
Read case analysis
Company law RLR V.4-2018

MUNYAMPUNDU N’UNDI v. IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO_kn

Seizure of personal assets of shareholders or directors to satisfy company tax debts is unlawful unless a court has first determined their liability for the company's tax default. The principle of separate legal personality must be respected except where a court, upon clear evidence, decides to pierce the corporate veil.

  • Piercing corporate veil
  • Shareholder/director liability
  • Tax enforcement
  • Asset seizure
  • Separate legal personality
Read case analysis
Tax law RCOMAA 0056/2016/SC - RCOMAA 0061/16/CS

TWAGIRAMUNGU v. IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHÔRO

The Supreme Court annulled the seizure of Twagiramungu Vénuste’s assets for Calibre Engeneering Ltd’s tax debt, holding that personal liability had not been judicially established.

  • Piercing the corporate veil
  • Shareholder/director liability
  • Tax enforcement
  • Retroactive application of law
  • Asset seizure
  • Piercing-the-corporate-veil
Read case analysis
Contract law RCOMA 0180/12/CS

34 IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO V.NDAMYU (2)

The Supreme Court held that Ndamyumugabe Jean Claude became the owner of the vehicle upon valid sale, regardless of mutation, but contributed to the seizure by failing to notify the tax authority as required. The Rwanda Revenue Authority was justified in seizing the vehicle until notified of the sale, but was liable for damages for the period after notification. Damages were recalculated based on reasonable loss of use, and moral damages and additional attorney fees were denied due to contributory fault.

  • Sale of goods
  • Vehicle registration
  • Tax enforcement
  • Damages
Read case analysis
Contract law RCOMA 0180/12/CS

34 IKIGO CY’IMISORO N’AMAHORO V.NDAMYU

The Supreme Court held that ownership of the vehicle transferred to Ndamyumugabe upon valid sale, regardless of mutation or notification, but his failure to notify the tax authority contributed to the seizure. The tax authority was justified in seizing the vehicle until notified of the sale, but was liable for damages for retaining it after notification. Ndamyumugabe was entitled to economic damages but not further moral damages or additional attorney fees.

  • Sale of goods
  • Vehicle registration
  • Tax enforcement
  • Damages
  • Ownership transfer
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

Rwanda decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.