ngoga vmukangoga nabandi

ngoga vmukangoga nabandi

The written testimonies presented by Ngoga Placide do not constitute new evidence within the meaning of the law, as they could have been obtained and presented during the original proceedings. Furthermore, the testimonies are not decisive as they do not provide conclusive proof (such as a sale contract) to overturn...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RS/REV/RC 00001/2021/CA
Parties
Applicant: Ngoga Placide; Respondent: Mukangoga Marie Louise; Respondent: Mugiramana Rosine; Respondent: Umuteteri Germaine; Respondent: Utarutwa Francine; Respondent: Hitiyise Jean-Luc; Respondent: Tuyisenge Irenée; Respondent: Mukamazimpaka Joselyne; Respondent: Niyonsenga Alice; Respondent: Mugiraneza Eric; Respondent: Bapfakurera Robert; Respondent: Murenzi Théoneste; Respondent: Nkurunziza Emmanuel; Respondent: Nyirinkindi Jean Marie Vianney; Respondent: Mushimire Dusenge Didier; Respondent: Mutamuliza Macline; Respondent: Musabirema Jackson; Respondent: Uwera Cyuzuzo; Respondent: Ishimwe Fabrice; Respondent: Mwiseneza Huguette
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
11 October 2022
Case Number
RS/REV/RC 00001/2021/CA
Procedural Posture
Civil Revision / Judgment on Admissibility of Revision Based on New Evidence
Outcome
application for revision dismissed as inadmissible
Legal Topics
Revision of Judgment, New Evidence, Inheritance, Distribution of Estate
Civil Procedure Family Law Revision of Judgment New Evidence Inheritance Distribution of Estate

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ngoga Placide

Applicant

Mukangoga Marie Louise

Respondent

Mugiramana Rosine

Respondent

Umuteteri Germaine

Respondent

Utarutwa Francine

Respondent

Hitiyise Jean-Luc

Respondent

Tuyisenge Irenée

Respondent

Mukamazimpaka Joselyne

Respondent

Niyonsenga Alice

Respondent

Mugiraneza Eric

Respondent

Bapfakurera Robert

Respondent

Murenzi Théoneste

Respondent

Nkurunziza Emmanuel

Respondent

Nyirinkindi Jean Marie Vianney

Respondent

Mushimire Dusenge Didier

Respondent

Mutamuliza Macline

Respondent

Musabirema Jackson

Respondent

Uwera Cyuzuzo

Respondent

Ishimwe Fabrice

Respondent

Mwiseneza Huguette

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Revision / Judgment on Admissibility of Revision Based on New Evidence

  1. 1 Whether the written testimonies of Rucibigango Robert and Karamba Jean Claude constitute new evidence justifying revision of judgment RCAA00029/2018/CA
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is liable for costs and attorney fees

Ratio Decidendi

The written testimonies presented by Ngoga Placide do not constitute new evidence within the meaning of the law, as they could have been obtained and presented during the original proceedings. Furthermore, the testimonies are not decisive as they do not provide conclusive proof (such as a sale contract) to overturn the previous judgment. Therefore, the application for revision is inadmissible.

Court Disposition

application for revision dismissed as inadmissible

Orders

  • The application for revision based on new evidence is not admitted for consideration.
  • The previous judgment RCAA00029/2018/CA of 16/07/2021 remains in force.