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’Ikirenga rwatesheje agaciro icyemezo cy’Urukiko Rwisumbuye, rwemeza ko ubujurire bwa Ndayobotse bwatanzwe mu buryo budakurikije igihe kandi ko cyamunara yari yarateshejwe agaciro.
The appeal grounds submitted by Ntaganzwa Alphonse were filed well beyond the statutory 30-day period after the judgment copy was made available, without a legally valid justification. Therefore, the grounds are inadmissible and the prior conviction and sentence remain in force.
Source excerpt
The appellant failed to submit grounds of appeal within the statutory period despite having access to the judgment; Covid-19 did not constitute a valid excuse as he was able to file the notice of appeal on time. Therefore, the appeal was inadmissible and the original conviction and sentence stand.
Source excerpt
The appeal was not based solely on the clarification decision but sought to challenge the principal judgment after the statutory appeal period had expired. The law does not permit using clarification or correction as a means to reopen appeal of the main judgment after the deadline. Therefore, the appeal was inadmissible for being out of time.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal dismissed Kochaniewicz Grzegorz’s appeal as late, holding that exequatur proceedings are treated as unilateral applications with a five-working-day appeal period.
The Court of Appeal held that grounds of appeal filed by Nzizera on 06/10/2022 and 07/10/2022 were timely as they were submitted within one month after the judgment copy was uploaded to IECMS. The High Court erred in holding Nzizera's claim inadmissible on the basis of res judicata, as previous judgments did not resolve the substantive issues raised. However, Nzizera failed to provide sufficient evidence to support his substantive claims regarding misappropriation of company funds, and the request for an audit was properly denied as it was not raised at first instance. No party was awarded co…
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that Niyonzima Pacifique's grounds of appeal were submitted after the statutory period and did not meet the legal requirements for late submission. Therefore, the appeal grounds were inadmissible and the High Court's judgment, including the 15-year sentence, remained in force.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed an administrative appeal as inadmissible because the appellant filed substantive grounds after the appeal period had expired.
The High Court held that an absent party’s appeal time runs from notice of judgment, not the judgment date, and set aside a mutation order made without jurisdiction.
The Court of Appeal held that the enforcement claim was properly before the Commercial High Court, but dismissed the appeal as filed out of time.
Explore more
