UBUSHINJABYAHA v. MBARUSHIMANA
__CONTENT_FILTERED__
Source excerpt
- Content Filtered
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
Search and filter Rwanda case law
Results update automatically as you type.
Rwanda decisions
Source-linked decisions currently available to browse
UBUSHINJACYAHA v. JYAMUBANDI
The Court of Appeal dismissed Jyamubandi Vincent’s appeal, holding that no further sentence reduction was available because the High Court had already imposed the minimum lawful sentence.
- Sentencing
- Mitigating circumstances
- Appeals procedure
- Drug offences
- Criminal-sentencing
- Mitigating-circumstances
UBUSHINJACYAHA v. HAKIZIMANA
The Court of Appeal held that a cannabis trafficking sentence cannot fall below the statutory minimum of 15 years and RWF 5,000,000, and refused suspension.
- Drug trafficking
- Sentencing
- Mitigation of sentence
- Suspended sentence
- Criminal-law
- Drug-trafficking
UBUSHINJACYAHA v. TUYISHIME
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appellant’s challenge and upheld his conviction for cannabis trafficking, finding no legal or factual error in the lower court’s reasoning.
- Drug offences
- Appeal procedure
- Burden of proof
- Sentencing
- Criminal-law
- Drug-offences
THE PROSECUTION V. SULULU MARUGIRA ET AL.
The Court of Appeal upheld armed robbery convictions but reduced each accused’s sentence to eight years and a fine of 5,000,000 Rwf.
- Armed robbery
- Sentencing
- Mitigating circumstances
- Appeal procedure
- Armed-robbery
- Mitigating-circumstances
UBUSHINJACYAHA v. JYAMUBANDI
The Court of Appeal dismissed Jyamubandi Vincent’s appeal, holding that his sentence was already the minimum permitted by law after mitigation.
- Sentencing
- Mitigating circumstances
- Appeals
- Drug offences
- Criminal-sentencing
- Mitigating-circumstances
ENTREPRISE D’ADDUCTION D’EAU ET DE CONSTRUCTION v AKARERE KA GATSIBO
EADECO failed to complete the contracted works within the agreed period, with only 34% of the works completed by the contractual deadline and 50% after additional time. The delays were attributable to EADECO, not to the respondent's conduct. The evidence provided by EADECO for compensation claims was insufficient and not independently verified. The contract and law entitled Akarere ka Gatsibo to terminate the contract for delay. Therefore, the appeal lacked merit and was dismissed.
Source excerpt
- Breach of contract
- Termination of contract
- Public procurement contracts
- Damages and compensation
- Procedural law
UBUSHINJACYAHA v. RUKUNDO
The appeal was dismissed because the lower courts had already imposed the minimum sentence allowed by law, and no error or misapplication of law or discretion was demonstrated. However, the fine was reduced as the appellate court found a lower amount more appropriate to the circumstances.
Source excerpt
- Sentencing
- Mitigating circumstances
- Drug offenses
- Appeal procedure
UBUSHINJABYAHA v. MANIRAGUHA
The Court of Appeal dismissed Maniraguha’s appeal and maintained a 15-year sentence for defiling an 8-year-old child, finding no misuse of law or discretion.
- Sentencing
- Appeals
- Sexual offences
- Mitigating circumstances
- Criminal-sentencing
- Sexual-offences
Explore more