Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Rwanda decisions
Source-linked decisions currently available to browse
The Court of Appeal upheld armed robbery convictions but reduced each appellant’s sentence to 8 years and a 5,000,000 Frw fine, relying on mitigating circumstances.
The Court of Appeal upheld a 16-year sentence and RWF 6,000,000 fine for cannabis possession and dealing, holding that no further reduction was justified.
The Court of Appeal held that the urgent commercial claim was not barred as a second appeal, but dismissed the appeal as late under Article 188 of Law No. 22/2018.
The Supreme Court dismissed TSC’s extraordinary appeal and upheld payment of the outstanding contract balance, TVA, and litigation costs to GMS.
The Court of Appeal held that the appellant failed to prove error in the lower courts’ finding of cannabis trafficking, so the appeal was dismissed.
The Court of Appeal dismissed Ntirenganya’s appeal, holding there was no basis for further sentence reduction, but reduced the fine to RWF 5,000,000.
The appeal was filed 39 days after the judgment was uploaded to IECMS, exceeding the 30-day statutory period. The appellant failed to prove notification occurred later or that any impediment justified the delay. The appeal is inadmissible as untimely.
Source excerpt
SANLAM AG Plc failed to prove that the insured driver or Bizimana Védaste acted with the specific intent to cause harm (faute intentionnelle). The insured's and victim's actions, while negligent, did not amount to intentional conduct that would exclude insurance coverage. The victim's fault was not the sole cause of the accident, nor was it intentional. Therefore, SANLAM remains liable for compensation under Rwandan law.
Source excerpt
The correct sentence is that stated in the reasoning section of the High Court judgment—17 years imprisonment and a fine of 5,000,000 RWF—because the reasoning explains the basis for the sentence. No further reduction is warranted as the High Court already sufficiently mitigated the sentence given the gravity and circumstances of the offense.
Source excerpt
Explore more
