GASANA v MUNYAMASHYAKA N’ABANDI

GASANA v MUNYAMASHYAKA N’ABANDI

The value relevant to jurisdiction was that of the actual disputed property, namely the land segment measuring 287 m² on UPI: 1/03/05/03/6301, not the entire parcel UPI: 1/03/05/03/2655. Since that disputed segment was valued at Frw 12,399,030, the monetary threshold for a second appeal was not met, so the Court of...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: GASANA; Respondent: MUNYAMASHYAKA Robert; Respondent: NKUSI Isaac; Respondent: TWAGIRAMUNGU Jean Bosco
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Second Appeal; Objection on Jurisdiction
Outcome
Objection on lack of jurisdiction upheld; second appeal not received.
Legal Topics
Value of the Subject Matter, Mutation of Land Rights, Admissibility of Second Appeal, Litigation Costs
Source Language
rw
Civil Procedure Property Law Jurisdiction Value of the Subject Matter Mutation of Land Rights Admissibility of Second Appeal Litigation Costs

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GASANA

Appellant

MUNYAMASHYAKA Robert

Respondent

NKUSI Isaac

Respondent

TWAGIRAMUNGU Jean Bosco

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Second Appeal; Objection on Jurisdiction

  1. 1 Whether the value of the subject matter for purposes of second appeal jurisdiction should be assessed by reference to the whole land parcel UPI: 1/03/05/03/2655 or only the disputed segment UPI: 1/03/05/03/6301.
  2. 2 Whether the second appeal by Gasana Emmanuel meets the statutory monetary threshold for the Court of Appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents are entitled to litigation costs and advocate's fees at this stage.

Ratio Decidendi

The value relevant to jurisdiction was that of the actual disputed property, namely the land segment measuring 287 m² on UPI: 1/03/05/03/6301, not the entire parcel UPI: 1/03/05/03/2655. Since that disputed segment was valued at Frw 12,399,030, the monetary threshold for a second appeal was not met, so the Court of Appeal lacked jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Objection on lack of jurisdiction upheld; second appeal not received.

Orders

  • The objection to the Court of Appeal's jurisdiction was upheld.
  • Gasana Emmanuel's second appeal was declared inadmissible for lack of jurisdiction.