NKURIKIYEYEZU v NGOBOKA

NKURIKIYEYEZU v NGOBOKA

The Court held that the first-instance court and the High Court addressed the same core dispute—the existence and effect of the 18/09/2018 sale agreement for the immovable property—and both relied on the appellant’s signature on that agreement and on the contractual documents to order registration of the property in...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: NKURIKIYEYEZU Michael; Respondent: NGOBOKA James
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Second Appeal; Admissibility/procedural Jurisdiction
Outcome
Second appeal not admitted; objection upheld
Legal Topics
Second Appeal Admissibility, Same Reasons for Losing in Both Lower Courts, Sale Agreement Over Immovable Property, Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal, Costs and Advocate Fees
Source Language
rw
Civil Law Civil Procedure Property Law Second Appeal Admissibility Same Reasons for Losing in Both Lower Courts Sale Agreement Over Immovable Property Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal Costs and Advocate Fees

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

NKURIKIYEYEZU Michael

Appellant

NGOBOKA James

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Second Appeal; Admissibility/procedural Jurisdiction

  1. 1 Whether the second appeal was admissible before the Court of Appeal under Article 52 of Law No. 30/2018
  2. 2 Whether the appellant had been defeated in both lower courts on the same grounds
  3. 3 Whether the agreement of 18/09/2018 was the same issue litigated in the lower courts

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the first-instance court and the High Court addressed the same core dispute—the existence and effect of the 18/09/2018 sale agreement for the immovable property—and both relied on the appellant’s signature on that agreement and on the contractual documents to order registration of the property in the respondent’s name. Because the two lower courts used the same legal reasoning and reached the same answer on the same issue, the appellant was defeated in both courts on the same grounds, so the second appeal was outside the Court of Appeal’s jurisdiction and inadmissible.

Court Disposition

Second appeal not admitted; objection upheld

Orders

  • Ngoboka James’ objection was upheld.
  • The second appeal filed by Nkurikiyeyezu Michel was declared inadmissible for lack of jurisdiction.