BAYINGANA N’ABANDI v. UMUJYI WA KIGALI

BAYINGANA N’ABANDI v. UMUJYI WA KIGALI

The appellants' claim was inadmissible because they failed to file suit within 15 days of the disagreement on compensation valuation as required by law. The 120-day period for payment applies only where compensation is agreed, which was not the case here. The legal representation by Noble Advocates Ltd was valid as...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RADAA00009/2024/CA
Parties
Appellant: Bayingana Holvis, Bayingana Cassandra, Uwase Ornella, Munyana Jolie, Bayingana Yvan; Respondent: Umujyi wa Kigali
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
21 November 2025
Case Number
RADAA00009/2024/CA
Procedural Posture
Administrative Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Expropriation for Public Interest, Compensation for Expropriation, Procedural Time Limits, Standing of Legal Representatives
Source Language
rw
Administrative Law Expropriation Law Expropriation for Public Interest Compensation for Expropriation Procedural Time Limits Standing of Legal Representatives

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bayingana Holvis, Bayingana Cassandra, Uwase Ornella, Munyana Jolie, Bayingana Yvan

Appellant

Umujyi wa Kigali

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Administrative Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the appeal by Bayingana and others was admissible given procedural requirements under expropriation law
  2. 2 Whether the claimants were entitled to compensation or restitution for expropriation after missing statutory deadlines
  3. 3 Whether the legal representation by Noble Advocates Ltd for the City of Kigali was valid

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants' claim was inadmissible because they failed to file suit within 15 days of the disagreement on compensation valuation as required by law. The 120-day period for payment applies only where compensation is agreed, which was not the case here. The legal representation by Noble Advocates Ltd was valid as the firm is composed of registered advocates. The lower courts did not err in their procedural handling. The appeal was dismissed and costs awarded to the respondent.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The judgment of the High Court in RADA00066/2022/HC/KIG is upheld.
  • Appellants jointly to pay the City of Kigali RWF 300,000 in costs and RWF 500,000 in attorney fees at this level, in addition to RWF 1,040,000 awarded at the previous level.