MAHINYUZA V MUKESHIMANA N’ABANDI

MAHINYUZA V MUKESHIMANA N’ABANDI

Mukeshimana Marthe acted within the authority granted by Mahinyuza Aloys via written procuration until its revocation on 4/12/2017. By that time, Mahinyuza had already acquired full ownership of the property after compensating Mukantabana Donatille. All sales conducted before revocation were lawful. Buyers/interveners who purchased in good faith are entitled to registration. Mahinyuza Aloys's appeal lacks merit, and he is liable for certain costs and damages.

Citation
RCA 00273/2020/HC/KIG
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Mahinyuza Aloys; Respondent/defendant: Mukeshimana Marthe; Interested Party: Mukantabana Donatille; Intervener (voluntary): Umwiza Solange; Intervener (forced): Uwitonze Joachim; Intervener (forced): Mbagizente Edouard; Intervener (forced): Gatanazi Damien; Intervener (forced): Byensi Bonaventure; Intervener (forced): Nsengamungu Emmanuel; Intervener (forced): Kanyamahanga Vianney; Intervener (forced): Sindikubwabo Vianney; Intervener (forced): Nshimiyimana Saverien; Intervener (forced): Mutuyimana Jean Claude
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
24 June 2021
Case Number
RCA 00273/2020/HC/KIG
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (family/property) / High Court Appellate Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; first instance judgment affirmed with minor modifications.
Legal Topics
Procuration/power of Attorney, Division of Matrimonial Property, Appeal Procedure, Good Faith Acquisition, Damages and Costs
Source Language
rw
Family Law Property Law Civil Procedure Procuration/power of Attorney Division of Matrimonial Property Appeal Procedure Good Faith Acquisition Damages and Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mahinyuza Aloys

Appellant/plaintiff

Mukeshimana Marthe

Respondent/defendant

Mukantabana Donatille

Interested Party

Umwiza Solange

Intervener (voluntary)

Uwitonze Joachim

Intervener (forced)

Mbagizente Edouard

Intervener (forced)

Gatanazi Damien

Intervener (forced)

Byensi Bonaventure

Intervener (forced)

Nsengamungu Emmanuel

Intervener (forced)

Kanyamahanga Vianney

Intervener (forced)

Sindikubwabo Vianney

Intervener (forced)

Nshimiyimana Saverien

Intervener (forced)

Mutuyimana Jean Claude

Intervener (forced)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (family/property) / High Court Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mukeshimana Marthe exceeded the authority granted by Mahinyuza Aloys in selling property
  2. 2 Whether property sold by Mukeshimana Marthe should be restored to Mukantabana Donatille
  3. 3 Whether buyers/interveners are entitled to registration of purchased plots

Ratio Decidendi

Mukeshimana Marthe acted within the authority granted by Mahinyuza Aloys via written procuration until its revocation on 4/12/2017. By that time, Mahinyuza had already acquired full ownership of the property after compensating Mukantabana Donatille. All sales conducted before revocation were lawful. Buyers/interveners who purchased in good faith are entitled to registration. Mahinyuza Aloys's appeal lacks merit, and he is liable for certain costs and damages.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; first instance judgment affirmed with minor modifications.

Orders

  • Mahinyuza Aloys's appeal is dismissed as unfounded.
  • The first instance judgment (RC00095/2019/TGI/GSBO) is affirmed.