UMUJYI WA KIGALI v. BAYINGANA

UMUJYI WA KIGALI v. BAYINGANA

The Court of Appeal found that both lower courts decided the main issues—entitlement to compensation and legal status of the property—on the same grounds, and thus, under Article 52(3) of Law N° 30/2018, the second appeal was inadmissible. The respondent was entitled to compensation for expropriation, and the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RADAA 00023/2024/CA
Parties
Applicant: Umujyi wa Kigali; Respondent: Bayingana Alexis
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
9 May 2025
Case Number
RADAA 00023/2024/CA
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Ruling on Second Appeal and Jurisdictional Objection
Outcome
Second appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; respondent awarded costs.
Legal Topics
Compensation for Expropriation, Jurisdiction of Appellate Courts, Standing to Sue, Public Interest Expropriation, Legal Status of Property in Wetlands
Source Language
rw
Administrative Law Property Law Civil Procedure Compensation for Expropriation Jurisdiction of Appellate Courts Standing to Sue Public Interest Expropriation Legal Status of Property in Wetlands

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Umujyi wa Kigali

Applicant

Bayingana Alexis

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Ruling on Second Appeal and Jurisdictional Objection

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to entertain a second appeal when the applicant lost in both lower courts on the same grounds
  2. 2 Whether Bayingana Alexis was entitled to compensation for property expropriated by Umujyi wa Kigali
  3. 3 Whether the compensation awarded was based on legally recognized property and proper valuation

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal found that both lower courts decided the main issues—entitlement to compensation and legal status of the property—on the same grounds, and thus, under Article 52(3) of Law N° 30/2018, the second appeal was inadmissible. The respondent was entitled to compensation for expropriation, and the applicant's arguments did not alter the legal basis already established.

Court Disposition

Second appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; respondent awarded costs.

Orders

  • Umujyi wa Kigali to pay Bayingana Alexis 700,000 Frw (500,000 Frw for advocate fees, 200,000 Frw for litigation costs)