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 Supreme Court held that Tuyishime Samuel lacked standing to seek resolution of conflicting judgments over family property while his mother remained alive.
The Supreme Court held that Tuyishime Samuel lacked standing to challenge conflicting judgments over his late father’s property while the surviving spouse remained alive.
The Supreme Court found that the previous judgment lacked clarity regarding the total area and identification of the land to be inherited, which created ambiguity and hindered execution. It is necessary to clarify that the total land to be divided among the heirs is 17,022.047925 square meters, as identified by the National Land Authority, and listed by UPI numbers.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that Mazimpaka Christian, as respondent who did not initiate the substantive suit, lacked standing to file an urgent application before the High Court. The High Court erred in entertaining and granting such application. Accordingly, the High Court's decision was set aside as a nullity.
Source excerpt
The court held that Mukanyonga Félicité did not prove she was the sole heir of her late mother and therefore lacked standing and legal capacity to sue for the estate in her own name. Consequently, the lower courts erred in accepting her claim. All related judgments were set aside, and the matter reverted to its prior status.
Source excerpt
Nyirasafari Gaudentia failed to provide a legally valid marriage certificate or a valid substitute judgment as required by law to establish standing to claim succession property. The documents she relied on (attestations, letters, ID, and a substitute judgment) did not meet the legal requirements, as the substitute judgment had been annulled and other documents were not legally sufficient. Therefore, she lacked standing, and her claims could not be entertained.
Source excerpt
The appeal by Mukamana BĂ©atrice was dismissed because she filed in her own name while claiming to represent the Seburimbwa Joseph family without proof of authority, making her claim inadmissible. Habumugisha CĂ©lestin's appeal was dismissed because he failed to provide valid evidence that the property in question was solely his, and any alleged transfer of interest was invalid without the co-owner's consent and proper notarization. Both appeals lacked merit, and the lower court's decision was upheld.
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court held that the petitioner had standing and upheld the challenged succession provisions as constitutional.
The impugned provisions do not violate the constitutional principles of equality, non-discrimination, protection of the family, or the right to property. The distinctions made by the law are justified by the need to protect the surviving spouse, who has contributed to the acquisition of matrimonial property and assumes sole responsibility for the family after the spouse's death. Succession rights of other heirs arise only when succession opens, and the law provides mechanisms to protect their interests. There is no unconstitutional deprivation or discrimination.
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court held that the impugned provisions of Law Nº 27/2016 do not violate the constitutional principles of equality, non-discrimination, protection of the family, or the right to property. The distinctions made in favor of the surviving spouse are justified by the need to protect the spouse who shared responsibility for acquiring matrimonial property and to prevent family disputes. The law does not deprive other heirs of their rights, as succession opens only upon the death or remarriage of the surviving spouse, at which point all heirs' rights are recognized. The right to property…
Source excerpt
Explore more
