KABIRIGI v. UWERA N’ABANDI (ADD)

KABIRIGI v. UWERA N’ABANDI (ADD)

The Court held that Kabirigi Gérard's failure to file a second appeal does not constitute forfeiture of the right to seek revision for injustice, as both lower courts dismissed his claim on the same grounds, making a second appeal inadmissible under Article 52 of Law No. 30/2018. Therefore, the objection to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RS/INJUST/RC00006/2024/CA
Parties
Applicant: Kabirigi Gérard; Representative of Applicant: Kabera Francis; Respondent: Uwera Eugénie; Respondent: Mutuyimana Oscar; Respondent: Gakuba Emmanuel; Respondent: Sagahutu Jean Baptiste; Interested Party: Musabyimana Ernestine; Interested Party: Muvandimwe Modeste; Interested Party: Ukobizaba Olivier
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
21 October 2025
Case Number
RS/INJUST/RC00006/2024/CA
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (revision for Injustice) / Interlocutory Ruling on Admissibility of Revision for Injustice
Outcome
Objection to admissibility of revision for injustice dismissed; proceedings to continue on merits.
Legal Topics
Revision for Injustice, Admissibility of Claims, Appeal Process, Res Judicata, Land Disputes
Source Language
rw
Civil Procedure Property Law Revision for Injustice Admissibility of Claims Appeal Process Res Judicata Land Disputes

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kabirigi Gérard

Applicant

Kabera Francis

Representative of Applicant

Uwera Eugénie

Respondent

Mutuyimana Oscar

Respondent

Gakuba Emmanuel

Respondent

Sagahutu Jean Baptiste

Respondent

Musabyimana Ernestine

Interested Party

Muvandimwe Modeste

Interested Party

Ukobizaba Olivier

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (revision for Injustice) / Interlocutory Ruling on Admissibility of Revision for Injustice

  1. 1 Whether Kabirigi Gérard forfeited the right to seek revision for injustice by not filing a second appeal to the Court of Appeal
  2. 2 Whether the claim for revision for injustice is admissible when the applicant lost in both lower courts on the same grounds

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that Kabirigi Gérard's failure to file a second appeal does not constitute forfeiture of the right to seek revision for injustice, as both lower courts dismissed his claim on the same grounds, making a second appeal inadmissible under Article 52 of Law No. 30/2018. Therefore, the objection to admissibility of his revision claim is unfounded.

Court Disposition

Objection to admissibility of revision for injustice dismissed; proceedings to continue on merits.

Orders

  • Objection to admissibility of Kabirigi Gérard's claim for revision for injustice is dismissed.
  • The case will proceed to hearing on 03/11/2025 at 10:00 AM.