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 held that a late jurisdictional objection and a late cross-appeal were inadmissible, and affirmed liability for breach of a freight contract.
The Court of Appeal dismissed CSC and EC Proprietary’s appeal and upheld the refusal to stay execution of judgments while review proceedings were pending.
The Court of Appeal dismissed TURQUAZ Consultancy Ltd’s application to interpret its prior judgment, holding that interpretation cannot add issues not decided on appeal.
The Supreme Court set aside a Court of Appeal judgment that had ruled on the merits after hearing only a preliminary objection, and remitted the appeal for hearing.
The Supreme Court found no injustice in the appellate judgment and upheld the award. It held Mailco Ltd owed Road Solutions Pavement Products 21,025 USD.
The Supreme Court has jurisdiction over the appeal by Mukarushakiro and Bagenzi because the amount in dispute exceeds the statutory threshold, and the High Court's error in citing the law's title/date does not amount to reliance on an inexistent law. Mukangenzi's appeal is inadmissible as it was lodged out of time; the attempt to use rectification to reopen the appeal period is an abuse of process and not permitted.
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court held that a mistaken legal reference did not negate jurisdiction, but it rejected Mukangenzi Céline’s appeal as out of time.
The Supreme Court held that a foreign appellant is treated as a plaintiff on appeal and may be required to furnish the security deposit demanded of foreign litigants.
The Supreme Court held that a lease dispute between traders over premises used for business was commercial and belonged in Commercial Courts; the High Court lacked jurisdiction.
Applications to intervene against Supreme Court judgments are inadmissible, as neither the law in force at the time of filing nor subsequent law provides for such a procedure. The only exceptions to the finality of Supreme Court judgments are revision on new grounds or correction of errors, not intervention by third parties.
Source excerpt
Explore more
