GAPCO vs IKIGO GISHINZWE IMIKORESHEREZE Y’UBUTAKA MU RWANDA N’ABANDI. [

GAPCO vs IKIGO GISHINZWE IMIKORESHEREZE Y’UBUTAKA MU RWANDA N’ABANDI. [

The Court of Appeal found that GAPCO lost in both lower courts on the same essential ground: failure to prove legal ownership of the disputed land. Both courts determined that GAPCO's evidence (Acte de notoriété, administrative certificates) did not establish a valid transfer or registration of title. As the legal...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RADAA00010/2024/CA
Parties
Appellant: GAPCO Rwanda Ltd; Respondent: Ikigo Gishinzwe Imikoreshereze y’Ubutaka mu Rwanda; Respondent: Rwandatel Ltd in Liquidation; Respondent: Mujawamariya Cathérine; Respondent: Lake Petroleum Ltd
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
17 January 2025
Case Number
RADAA00010/2024/CA
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed as inadmissible for lack of jurisdiction
Legal Topics
Land Registration, Ownership Dispute, Jurisdiction of Appellate Courts, Burden of Proof
Source Language
rw
Property Law Civil Procedure Land Registration Ownership Dispute Jurisdiction of Appellate Courts Burden of Proof

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GAPCO Rwanda Ltd

Appellant

Ikigo Gishinzwe Imikoreshereze y’Ubutaka mu Rwanda

Respondent

Rwandatel Ltd in Liquidation

Respondent

Mujawamariya Cathérine

Respondent

Lake Petroleum Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment

  1. 1 Whether GAPCO Rwanda Ltd is entitled to be registered as owner of land UPI: 3/07/02/1455
  2. 2 Whether the appeal is within the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal under Rwandan law
  3. 3 Whether the lower courts erred in their assessment of evidence regarding ownership and registration of the disputed land

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal found that GAPCO lost in both lower courts on the same essential ground: failure to prove legal ownership of the disputed land. Both courts determined that GAPCO's evidence (Acte de notoriété, administrative certificates) did not establish a valid transfer or registration of title. As the legal and factual issues were the same in both lower courts, the appeal was inadmissible under Article 52(3) of Law No 30/2018. The Court of Appeal therefore lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed as inadmissible for lack of jurisdiction

Orders

  • The appeal by GAPCO Rwanda Ltd is not admitted as it falls outside the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal.
  • The judgment of the High Court, Musanze Chamber (RADA00016/2022/HC/MUS), remains in force.