RUCAMIHIGO vs MUREKATETE VERVELDE N’UNDI

RUCAMIHIGO vs MUREKATETE VERVELDE N’UNDI

The applicant was defeated in both lower courts on the same substantive issue—whether the respondent fulfilled her contractual obligations—thus, under Article 52(3) of Law No. 30/2018, a second appeal is inadmissible. The respondents are entitled to reasonable costs and attorney fees due to the necessity of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RCAA00045/2024/CA
Parties
Applicant: Rucamihigo Alphonse; Respondent: Murekatete Clémentine Vervelde; Respondent: Karega Jean Baptiste
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
12 September 2025
Case Number
RCAA00045/2024/CA
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Appellate Review on Jurisdictional Objection
Outcome
Appeal dismissed as inadmissible for lack of jurisdiction; costs and attorney fees awarded to respondents.
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Jurisdiction of Appellate Court, Contract Performance, Specific Performance, Damages, Costs and Attorney Fees
Source Language
rw
Civil Law Contract Law Property Law Civil Procedure Res Judicata Jurisdiction of Appellate Court Contract Performance Specific Performance +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rucamihigo Alphonse

Applicant

Murekatete Clémentine Vervelde

Respondent

Karega Jean Baptiste

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Appellate Review on Jurisdictional Objection

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was defeated in both lower courts on the same grounds, barring a second appeal under Article 52(3) of Law No. 30/2018
  2. 2 Whether the contract for sale of property should be rescinded for non-payment
  3. 3 Whether the respondents are entitled to costs and attorney fees

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was defeated in both lower courts on the same substantive issue—whether the respondent fulfilled her contractual obligations—thus, under Article 52(3) of Law No. 30/2018, a second appeal is inadmissible. The respondents are entitled to reasonable costs and attorney fees due to the necessity of defending against the inadmissible appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed as inadmissible for lack of jurisdiction; costs and attorney fees awarded to respondents.

Orders

  • Objection to jurisdiction upheld.
  • Appeal by Rucamihigo Alphonse declared inadmissible.