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
Decisions matching the current search
The Court of Appeal upheld a jurisdictional objection and struck out RRA’s second appeal, finding it had lost in both lower courts on the same grounds.
The Supreme Court held that Mongolia Clearing Agency Ltd was liable for customs duties on goods lost in transit and that SONARWA was right to pay and seek reimbursement.
The Court held that RRA's forfeiture of Bugingo Martin's vehicle was unlawful because there was no admission of guilt or conviction by a competent court as required by the East African Community Customs Management Act. Consequently, Bugingo Martin was entitled to the return of his vehicle and compensation for proven loss of use, as his claims were substantiated and not new to the proceedings.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that trading in elephant ivory without permits is punishable under EAC customs law, but there was no proof of killing elephants.
The Court of Appeal held that ivory selling was not proof of elephant poaching, but it did amount to possessing prohibited goods under customs law.
The Commissioner of Customs has the authority under section 135 of EACCMA to demand payment of short-levied tax resulting from erroneous declaration, as this is distinct from offences involving forgery under section 203. The facts of this case do not involve forgery but an error in HS code declaration, justifying the tax demand without prosecution.
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court held that the Customs Commissioner had authority under Section 135 of the EACCMA to demand payment of the tax shortfall resulting from an incorrect customs declaration due to mistake, without the need for criminal prosecution under Section 203, as the respondent's conduct did not amount to use of false or fraudulent documents but rather a mistaken declaration. The respondent was therefore liable to pay the assessed tax and damages.
Source excerpt
The Commercial High Court held that customs authorities could not impose tax as an offence-based liability when the taxpayer did not admit the alleged incorrect declaration.
Rwanda Supreme Court upheld a VAT assessment against Ets Kalinda Sekwewe, holding that claimed exports were not properly declared to customs and proof of a loan was lacking.
The Supreme Court held that customs authorities could not demand tax payment or impose penalties where the taxpayer denied the offence; the matter had to follow lawful court procedure.
Explore more
