UNION TRADE CENTRE LIMITED (UTC) v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF RWANDA

The Appellant sued the Respondent for the actions of the Kigali City Abandoned Property Management Commission which in 2013 demanded that tenants in the Appellant’s premises, UTC Mall, remit their monthly rentals to the Commission. This forceful diversion of rent payments affected the Appellant’s ability to meet its mortgage obligations with the Bank of Kigali resulting in financial loss. Despite complaints made to the National Ombudsman, the Prosecutor General, the Governor of Kigali City, the Mayor of Nyarugenge, and the President of the Commission, no corrective action was taken. In its Reference, the Appellant averred that the appropriation of UTC Mall contravened the EAC Treaty and sought orders restraining the Respondent from interfering with the management of the property, damages incurred and costs.

In their preliminary objection, the Respondent alleged that: the claim was filed out of time; the Court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the case; and that the Respondent was wrongly sued for the actions of the Commission which had distinct legal personality under Rwandan law. They annexed a letter from the Commission to tenants of the Appellant dated 21st October, 2013 to their submissions and not to the Reference or to the Replying Affidavit.

The Trial Court found that: the Reference was properly instituted; the case was not time barred; and that the Respondent was responsible for the Commission’s misconduct. However, the Trial Court further states that: it had no jurisdiction to determine whether the Commission’s actions contravened Rwanda’s internal laws; and since this had not been proven, it could not draw a conclusion that due process had been violated, or whether the principles enshrined in Articles 6 (d) and 7 (2) had been breached. The Appellant had not established a Treaty violation attributable to the Respondent;

On appeal, the Appellant submitted that the Trial Court erred in law by holding that: the Abandoned Property Management Commission was not a de jure organ of the State of Rwanda; that is actions could not be attributed to the State of Rwanda; and that no Treaty violation had been established. The Appellant averred that the internationally wrongful actions of the State of Rwanda gave rise to new legal consequences/relations as between it and the Appellant.

In their Cross- Appeal, the Respondent claimed that: they were not liable of the actions of the Kigali City Abandoned Property Management Commission and the takeover of UTC mall complied with Rwandan law. They sought a reversal of the Trial Court’s findings.
During the appeal, the Appellate Division observed procedural anomalies in the Record of Appeal and addressed these in its judgment without delving into the merits of the appeal.