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 gave full effect to a settlement signed by all parties on 7 November 2025, terminating the appeal and ordering compliance with the agreed terms.
The Court of Appeal voided a 2021 donation of land because the donor exceeded the statutory portion allowed by law, and upheld costs against the appellant.
The Court of Appeal partially allowed the appeal, upheld invalidation of the 28/10/2021 will, added estate property, and ordered return of rental and bank funds.
The Supreme Court clarified its prior inheritance ruling, holding that all 30 UPI parcels listed in the land registry report form part of the Ruhabura succession.
The appeal was not based solely on the clarification decision but sought to challenge the principal judgment after the statutory appeal period had expired. The law does not permit using clarification or correction as a means to reopen appeal of the main judgment after the deadline. Therefore, the appeal was inadmissible for being out of time.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal found that Acte de notoriété No 79/86 and similar documents did not meet statutory requirements and thus had no legal value, but this did not affect the outcome because other evidence, including the purchase agreement and consistent testimony of all siblings except the applicant, established that the disputed land (UPI:1/03/02/04/301) belonged to Mukangenzi Clémence and Rukira Isidore, not the parents. The land registration certificate in the parents' names was obtained irregularly and could be set aside. The settlement agreement of 04/05/2024 was binding except for the di…
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court found that the previous judgment lacked clarity regarding the total area and identification of the land to be inherited, which created ambiguity and hindered execution. It is necessary to clarify that the total land to be divided among the heirs is 17,022.047925 square meters, as identified by the National Land Authority, and listed by UPI numbers.
Source excerpt
The court found that the land certificate for UPI:1/03/02/04/301 registered to AYINKAMIYE Denys and NTAMAKIRIRO Eugenie was obtained without legal basis, as the applicant failed to prove the origin of the land. The acts of notoriety presented did not meet the legal requirements and were invalid. Testimonies from the majority of siblings confirmed the land belonged to MUKANGENZI Clémence and RUKIRA Isidore. Therefore, the property does not form part of the estate to be inherited. Claims by MUJAWIMANA Perpetue were inadmissible as they were raised for the first time on appeal. Monetary claims a…
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court held there was no contradiction between a 2009 Abunzi decision and a 2013 Gasabo Intermediate Court judgment, and dismissed Muberandinda’s claim.
The Court of Appeal held that Mazimpaka Christian, as respondent who did not initiate the substantive suit, lacked standing to file an urgent application before the High Court. The High Court erred in entertaining and granting such application. Accordingly, the High Court's decision was set aside as a nullity.
Source excerpt
Explore more
