UMURYANGO WA KIMONYO UHAGARARIWE NA MARIDADI v RUBYAGIZA NABANDI

UMURYANGO WA KIMONYO UHAGARARIWE NA MARIDADI v RUBYAGIZA NABANDI

The Court of Appeal found that the appellant had lost in both lower courts on the same grounds—failure to provide evidence of ownership—thus, under Article 52 of Law No. 30/2018, the second appeal was not within its jurisdiction and could not be entertained.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RCAA 00032/2022/CA
Parties
Appellant: Umuryango wa Kimonyo uhagarariwe na Maridadi Grégoire; Respondent: Rubyagiza Sophonie; Respondent: Gahizi Eugène; Respondent: Ruzigana Alexis; Respondent: Mukabisangwa Béatrice; Respondent: Mpunga Eric
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
30 June 2023
Case Number
RCAA 00032/2022/CA
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal (second Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Appellate Courts, Res Judicata, Land Ownership, Burden of Proof
Source Language
rw
Civil Procedure Property Law Jurisdiction of Appellate Courts Res Judicata Land Ownership Burden of Proof

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Umuryango wa Kimonyo uhagarariwe na Maridadi Grégoire

Appellant

Rubyagiza Sophonie

Respondent

Gahizi Eugène

Respondent

Ruzigana Alexis

Respondent

Mukabisangwa Béatrice

Respondent

Mpunga Eric

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal (second Appeal)

  1. 1 Whether the second appeal by Umuryango wa Kimonyo is within the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal given prior defeats on the same grounds
  2. 2 Whether the lower courts erred in their assessment of evidence regarding land ownership and entitlement

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal found that the appellant had lost in both lower courts on the same grounds—failure to provide evidence of ownership—thus, under Article 52 of Law No. 30/2018, the second appeal was not within its jurisdiction and could not be entertained.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction

Orders

  • Appellant's second appeal is not admitted for lack of jurisdiction.
  • Appellant is ordered to pay each respondent 700,000 Frw for costs and attorney fees.