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
SIMACO Ltd lost in both lower courts on the same legal grounds regarding the return of mortgaged properties and denial of damages; thus, its second appeal is not within the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal. Only four properties not auctioned are to be returned, and costs and advocate fees are awarded to the respondent.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal rejected ECOMUJ Ltd’s second appeal as inadmissible, holding it had lost in both lower courts on the same grounds under Article 52 of Law No. 30/2018.
The High Court’s Special Chamber held it lacked first-instance jurisdiction over a human trafficking case because the alleged acts occurred entirely within Rwanda.
The Supreme Court held that HOME BASKET SACCO could oppose the prior judgment as a third party, but found the auction-formality dispute belonged elsewhere, so Uburiyemuye’s appeal failed.
The Court found that although auction annulment claims are processed under urgent procedures, they are independent and not strictly barred from a second appeal. However, since Ntaganda Joseph was defeated on the same grounds in both lower courts, Article 52(3) of Law No. 30/2018 barred his further appeal. Thus, the appeal was not admitted. Costs and attorney fees were awarded to the respondents based on the work done.
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court held that disputes over contradictions among final court decisions fall to the Court of Appeal, and transferred the case for lack of jurisdiction.
The lower court lacked jurisdiction because the principal claim was below the monetary threshold and additional amounts for damages and advocate fees were not contractually agreed, thus could not be added to the claim value.
Source excerpt
The principal debt alone did not meet the jurisdictional threshold for the Intermediate Court, and moral damages and counsel fees not included in the contract could not be added to the value of the subject matter. Therefore, the Intermediate Court lacked jurisdiction, and the case must be submitted to the competent Primary Court.
Source excerpt
Explore more
