Sign in
Rwanda Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Rwanda Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
1 court collection
Last checked

Rwanda decisions

Source-linked decisions currently available to browse

Criminal law

IMIRONGO CoA - No 24 - Febuary - 2025

The core binding principles are: (1) appellate courts must show, at least implicitly, that all material arguments and evidence were considered, but need not address each individually; (2) sentences cannot be increased on appeal if only the defendant appeals; (3) conspiracy to commit genocide is treated as genocide for intent and punishment; (4) accomplice liability in genocide does not require intent to destroy the group, only knowing assistance; (5) attempt liability does not apply to terrorist group membership; (6) new evidence for retrial must be truly new and material; (7) only parents or…

  • Appeals
  • Sentencing
  • Evidence
  • Genocide
  • Terrorism
  • Drug offenses
Read case analysis
Criminal law RPAA 00734/2024/CA

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. MWEREKANDE

The appellant failed to demonstrate any error or misuse of discretion by the High Court in imposing the sentence. The sentence already reflected appropriate mitigation, and no further reduction was warranted.

  • Drug offences
  • Sentencing
  • Mitigating circumstances
  • Appeal procedure
Read case analysis
Criminal law RPAA/ECON 00003/2022/CA

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABYARIMANA

The Court of Appeal held that the second appeal was inadmissible because the lower courts did not apply a law that was not in force at the time of the offence. The issue raised by the appellant concerned non-compliance with legal provisions, which is not a valid ground for a second appeal under Rwandan law. The correct law (Organic Law No. 01/2012/OL, Article 325) was applied, and any procedural errors do not justify a second appeal.

  • Embezzlement
  • Application of repealed law
  • Double jeopardy in appeals
  • Statutory interpretation
Read case analysis
Labour law RS/INJUST/RSOC 00008/2023/CA

TUMWESIGE v. EAR DIOCÈSE DE BYUMBA

The Court of Appeal held that Tumwesige Dinah was unlawfully dismissed for economic reasons because the labour-inspector procedure was not followed.

  • Unlawful termination
  • Redundancy for economic reasons
  • Employee compensation
  • Labour contract termination procedures
  • Unlawful-termination
  • Redundancy
Read case analysis
Criminal law RPAA00028/2024/CA

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HABIMANA N’UNDI

The Court of Appeal upheld convictions for cannabis trafficking and accomplice liability, refused attempt or possession recharacterization, and affirmed the minimum sentence.

  • Drug trafficking
  • Accomplice liability
  • Sentencing
  • Appeal procedure
  • Criminal-law
  • Drug-trafficking
Read case analysis
Criminal law RPAA 00055/2024/CA

UBUSHINJACYAHA v MANIZABAYO

The Court of Appeal dismissed Manizabayo’s appeal, holding that mistake about a child’s age is no defense to defilement and the 15-year sentence could not be reduced or suspended.

  • Defilement
  • Strict liability
  • Sentencing
  • Appeal procedure
  • Child-defilement
  • Strict-liability
Read case analysis
Criminal law RPAA 00735/2024/CA

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. NTIRENGANYA

The appeal was dismissed because the sentence imposed was already the minimum permitted by law for the offence, and no legal or factual error by the lower court was established. However, the fine was reduced to reflect the circumstances of the offence.

  • Drug offences
  • Sentencing
  • Appeal procedure
Read case analysis
Criminal law RPAA 00723/2024/CA

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. RUKUNDO

The appeal had no merit as the minimum sentence prescribed by law was already imposed, and no error or misuse of discretion by the lower courts was demonstrated. However, the fine was reduced to better fit the circumstances of the offense.

  • Drug trafficking
  • Sentencing
  • Mitigating circumstances
  • Appeal procedure
Read case analysis
Civil procedure RCOMAA 00080/2024/CA

PYRAMIDES MINERALS SUPPLY Ltd v AKARERE KA NYAMASHEKE

The Court of Appeal accepted PYRAMIDES MINERALS SUPPLY Ltd’s withdrawal of its appeal and ordered it to pay Akarere ka Nyamasheke 700,000 Frw in costs.

  • Withdrawal of claim
  • Contract termination
  • Costs and attorney fees
  • Withdrawal-of-claim
  • Procedural-costs
  • Attorney-fees
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

Rwanda decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.