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 CRBC Ltd itubahirije amasezerano yo gusuka itaka, rugenera DE HAGUENAU indishyi z’inyongera, rubihakana ku bindi byasabwe.
The Court of Appeal held that Benda Rosine’s second appeal was inadmissible because she had lost in the lower courts on the same grounds. Costs were awarded to the district.
The Court of Appeal held that UBUZIMA Polyclinic Ltd’s second appeal was inadmissible because it had lost in both lower courts on the same grounds.
The Court of Appeal declined second-appeal jurisdiction, holding that only damages awarded in the appealed judgment count toward the statutory threshold.
The Court of Appeal held that Kayirangwa Immaculée’s second appeal was inadmissible because she had lost in both lower courts on the same grounds.
The Court of Appeal held that a review on new evidence must be filed before the court that last decided the merits. Mukeshimana’s application was inadmissible.
The Court of Appeal upheld continued detention of Civ Rwasamanzi Emile, finding the military court had jurisdiction and that exceptional, serious reasons justified detention.
The core holding is that the Court of Appeal's precedents from July 2022 to June 2025 establish binding interpretations on jurisdiction, procedure, evidence, remedies, and substantive law across civil, commercial, labour, administrative, insurance, family, tax, and criminal matters. Lower courts and litigants must follow these lines unless overruled or changed by law. Procedural compliance, evidentiary sufficiency, and adherence to statutory and contractual obligations are mandatory. Remedies are limited to those proven and allowed by law. Precedent is binding unless expressly overruled.
Source excerpt
Court of Appeal digest consolidating precedents on guilty pleas, confession evidence, appellate sentencing, proof, and procedural requirements.
The Court of Appeal held that the second appeal was not receivable because the appellants had lost on the same jurisdiction issue in the lower courts. It also declined the respondent’s cross-appeal.
Explore more
