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 applicant's alleged new evidence (trial transcript) is not new, as he was present and signed it at trial. The grounds do not meet the statutory requirements for review. The application is inadmissible.
Source excerpt
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 held that evidence already debated in earlier proceedings is not new evidence, and dismissed Twahirwa Aimable’s review application as inadmissible.
The Court of Appeal held that Africana Buffalo Ltd’s review application based on new evidence was inadmissible because the cited decision was not new evidence under the law.
The High Court held that a civil party must be summoned in review proceedings. It found injustice in the review judgment, but upheld the original conviction.
The Supreme Court approved a mediation agreement in a review application over succession and land registration, and ordered the case closed without further procedure.
The Supreme Court held that Sikubwabo’s auction-suspension claim was timely under article 260(6), quashed the lower judgments, and resumed the appeal hearing.
The Supreme Court awarded damages for unfair dismissal, held the review was limited to issues raised, and refused new claims for reinstatement and a work certificate.
The Supreme Court found that the Court of Appeal exceeded its mandate by ruling on the merits of the case without hearing arguments beyond the preliminary objections, violating Article 11 of Law No. 22/2018. The judgment of the Court of Appeal is set aside, and the case is remitted for substantive hearing on the applicant's grounds of appeal.
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court held that BPR Atlas Mara’s review application lacked merit, confirmed the Court of Appeal’s ruling, and awarded Nkusi Evariste fees.
Explore more
