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
Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwemeje ko agaciro k’ikiburanwa ari ak’agace k’ubutaka kaburanwaga, rukanga kwakira ubujurire bwa kabiri bwa Gasana Emmanuel kubera kutuzuza imbibi z’amafaranga.
Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwabanje kwemeza ko ikiburanwa gifite agaciro ka 47.100.000 Frw, munsi ya 75.000.000 Frw; ubujurire bwa kabiri ntibwakiriwe.
Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwemeje ko nta buregeke bw’imanza buriho, rushimangira ko ubujurire bwa kabiri butari mu bubasha bwarwo kuko nta gihano cyari cyagenwe.
The Supreme Court held that the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge lacked territorial jurisdiction because RACI Ltd's registered office is in Remera, Gasabo District, which falls under the jurisdiction of the Intermediate Court of Gasabo. As a result, all judgments rendered by the Intermediate Court of Nyarugenge and the High Court in this matter are annulled, and Uwiragiye Faustin must restitute all sums received under those judgments to RACI Ltd.
Source excerpt
The High Court’s Special Chamber held it lacked first-instance jurisdiction over a human trafficking case because the alleged acts occurred entirely within Rwanda.
The Supreme Court held that disputes over contradictions among final court decisions fall to the Court of Appeal, and transferred the case for lack of jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court held that jurisdiction depends on damages awarded by any court in the case, not only the appellate court, and rejected the jurisdictional objection.
The lower court lacked jurisdiction because the principal claim was below the monetary threshold and additional amounts for damages and advocate fees were not contractually agreed, thus could not be added to the claim value.
Source excerpt
The principal debt alone did not meet the jurisdictional threshold for the Intermediate Court, and moral damages and counsel fees not included in the contract could not be added to the value of the subject matter. Therefore, the Intermediate Court lacked jurisdiction, and the case must be submitted to the competent Primary Court.
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court held that the appeal was admissible because the lower courts had decided the case on different grounds, so the jurisdiction objection failed.
Explore more
