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 Kayirangwa Immaculée’s second appeal was inadmissible because she had lost in both lower courts on the same grounds.
The Court of Appeal reaffirmed that its jurisdiction in second appeals is strictly limited to cases involving lack of jurisdiction, application of non-existent or inapplicable law, or judgments rendered by unauthorized judges. Procedural errors not affecting jurisdiction or fundamental rights must be addressed through other legal remedies, not second appeals. Mitigating circumstances must be timely raised and substantiated. Contracts for immovable property require authentic form. Bankruptcy proceedings suspend most claims except secured ones. Public procurement contractors bear liability for…
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court held that only one jointly registered marital asset was divisible, rejected the rest for lack of proof, and dismissed the extraordinary review application.
The Supreme Court approved a mediated settlement on compensation in a copyright dispute over the fictional characters Kanyombya and Sekaganda.
The Court found that the claim by MANUMETAL Ltd was not a true urgent application (référé) but rather a substantive claim handled under urgent procedure, thus allowing for a second appeal. However, the attachment was executed on an account not belonging to TEDMER INT TRADE CO Ltd, making the attachment invalid and the claim inadmissible. The Commercial High Court did not err in rejecting the claim, and TEDMER INT TRADE CO Ltd was entitled to costs and attorney fees.
Source excerpt
There is no evidence that Mugisha Hakim encroached upon Nzamukosha Annonciata's land; cadastral measurements and investigation show no unlawful occupation. Therefore, Mugisha retains his property, and Nzamukosha's claims for removal of structures and compensation are dismissed.
Source excerpt
The appeal by Sailer Energy UG-Partnership Ltd was not admitted because it was filed by a person without legal authority; the procuration presented was not validly executed before a notary and did not meet legal requirements, and the person filing was not a registered advocate at the time. Thus, the appeal was filed contrary to Articles 85 and 149 of Law No 22/2018.
Source excerpt
The appeal by Sailer Energy UG-Partnership Ltd was not admitted because it was filed by a person who was neither a legal representative nor had valid written authority, and the purported procuration was not properly executed or recognized, thus failing to comply with legal requirements for representation.
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court held that the dispute concerned agricultural land and belonged in the Primary Court, so the lower court judgments were annulled for lack of jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court dismissed Kyamazima’s appeal over a foreclosure auction, holding the dispute was commercial, not administrative, and that the matter had already been finally decided.
Explore more
