Rwanda Case Law

RLR- V.4 - 2020

Court

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that paragraph 2 of article 39 of Law N° 59/2008 is not inconsistent with articles 15, 16, and 34 of the Constitution. The Court found that the rationale for property sharing among cohabiting partners is joint acquisition or ownership, and that Supreme Court precedents have already established that property acquired during cohabitation is to be shared upon separation, regardless of the reason. The absence of explicit statutory language does not deprive parties of constitutional rights, and lower courts are bound to follow Supreme Court precedents. The petition was dismi…

Source excerpt

• Property rights of cohabiting partners
• Doctrine of precedent (stare decisis)
• Equality before the law
• Non-discrimination
• Right to property

Read case analysis

RE GATERA ET AL.

RE GATERA ET AL. (PETITION FOR REPEALING UNCONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

RS/INCONST/PÉN.0003/10/CS

Article 39 of Law No 59/2008 is not contrary to article 26 of the Constitution because it does not recognize unlawful marriages or grant marital rights, but ensures equitable sharing of property co-acquired or co-owned by persons who lived together as wife and husband. The law avoids injustice by preventing one party from appropriating property accumulated jointly, regardless of marital status.

Source excerpt

• Constitutionality of statutory provisions
• Property rights of cohabiting partners
• Marriage recognition
• Gender-based violence

Read case analysis