BENDA v. AKARERE KA BUGESERA

BENDA v. AKARERE KA BUGESERA

The Court of Appeal found that both the Intermediate Court and High Court decided against Benda Rosine on the same grounds: the evidence did not establish ownership, only a loan for pasture, and the land reverted to the state. Therefore, the second appeal is inadmissible for lack of jurisdiction.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RADAA00021/2024/CA
Parties
Applicant: Benda Rosine; Respondent: Akarere ka Bugesera
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
21 November 2025
Case Number
RADAA00021/2024/CA
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed as inadmissible
Legal Topics
Land Ownership, Appeals, Judicial Competence, Evidence Assessment
Source Language
rw
Civil Law Property Law Procedural Law Land Ownership Appeals Judicial Competence Evidence Assessment

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benda Rosine

Applicant

Akarere ka Bugesera

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the second appeal by Benda Rosine is within the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal
  2. 2 Whether Benda Rosine was defeated on the same grounds in both prior courts
  3. 3 Entitlement to land restitution or compensation

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal found that both the Intermediate Court and High Court decided against Benda Rosine on the same grounds: the evidence did not establish ownership, only a loan for pasture, and the land reverted to the state. Therefore, the second appeal is inadmissible for lack of jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed as inadmissible

Orders

  • Second appeal by Benda Rosine is not admitted due to lack of jurisdiction.
  • Benda Rosine to pay Akarere ka Bugesera 700,000 Frw for legal fees and costs.