AYINKAMIYE v KASINE N’ABANDI

AYINKAMIYE v KASINE N’ABANDI

The Court of Appeal found that Acte de notoriété No 79/86 and similar documents did not meet statutory requirements and thus had no legal value, but this did not affect the outcome because other evidence, including the purchase agreement and consistent testimony of all siblings except the applicant, established that...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RCAA 00032/2024/CA
Parties
Applicant: Ayinkamiye Antoine; Respondent: Mukangenzi Clémence; Respondent: Kasine Ingride Alexandra; Respondent: Mukantwali Denise; Respondent: Ayinkamiye Jean Celse; Intervener: Mujawimana Perpetue
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
30 May 2025
Case Number
RCAA 00032/2024/CA
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; cross-appeals dismissed; prior High Court judgment affirmed except as clarified.
Legal Topics
Succession, Land Registration, Evidence, Acte De Notoriété, Partition of Inheritance, Burden of Proof
Source Language
rw
Civil Law Succession Law Property Law Succession Land Registration Evidence Acte De Notoriété Partition of Inheritance +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ayinkamiye Antoine

Applicant

Mukangenzi Clémence

Respondent

Kasine Ingride Alexandra

Respondent

Mukantwali Denise

Respondent

Ayinkamiye Jean Celse

Respondent

Mujawimana Perpetue

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in relying on Acte de notoriété No 79/86 and oral testimony to determine ownership of land UPI:1/03/02/04/301
  2. 2 Whether the land registration certificate is indefeasible or can be set aside
  3. 3 Whether the agreement of 04/05/2024 should be binding as evidence of settlement

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal found that Acte de notoriété No 79/86 and similar documents did not meet statutory requirements and thus had no legal value, but this did not affect the outcome because other evidence, including the purchase agreement and consistent testimony of all siblings except the applicant, established that the disputed land (UPI:1/03/02/04/301) belonged to Mukangenzi Clémence and Rukira Isidore, not the parents. The land registration certificate in the parents' names was obtained irregularly and could be set aside. The settlement agreement of 04/05/2024 was binding except for the disputed land. Claims by Mujawimana Perpetue were inadmissible at this stage. No party was entitled...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; cross-appeals dismissed; prior High Court judgment affirmed except as clarified.

Orders

  • Ayinkamiye Antoine's appeal is dismissed for lack of merit.
  • Cross-appeals by Mukangenzi Clémence, Mukantwali Denise, Ayinkamiye Jean Celse, and Kasine Ingride Alexandra are dismissed for lack of merit.