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 Court of Appeal partially allowed the appeal, upheld invalidation of the 28/10/2021 will, added estate property, and ordered return of rental and bank funds.
The Court of Appeal held that a clarification ruling cannot be used to revive a late appeal on the principal judgment. The appeal was dismissed as out of time.
The court found that the land certificate for UPI:1/03/02/04/301 registered to AYINKAMIYE Denys and NTAMAKIRIRO Eugenie was obtained without legal basis, as the applicant failed to prove the origin of the land. The acts of notoriety presented did not meet the legal requirements and were invalid. Testimonies from the majority of siblings confirmed the land belonged to MUKANGENZI Clémence and RUKIRA Isidore. Therefore, the property does not form part of the estate to be inherited. Claims by MUJAWIMANA Perpetue were inadmissible as they were raised for the first time on appeal. Monetary claims a…
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court confirmed and enforced a mediated settlement resolving a succession dispute over estate land, ending the case without further proceedings.
The Supreme Court held that a succession completed in 2000 remained valid despite later paternity recognition in 2006, but awarded the applicants 500,000 Frw not included in that succession.
The applicant failed to demonstrate an exceptional and compelling reason for her absence at the hearing, as required by law. The inability to secure an advocate in time, despite being aware of the requirement and having been granted sufficient time, does not meet the legal threshold for reviving a dismissed case.
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court found that documentary evidence established Niyonsaba Micheline as the sole beneficiary of the life insurance policy taken for Kwizera David, and under Rwandan law and insurance principles, such proceeds are not part of the estate to be inherited by all heirs but are paid directly to the named beneficiary. The procedural objections raised by the respondent regarding timeliness were dismissed as the applicable law at the time did not impose a 30-day limit. The applicant failed to prove any right to the insurance proceeds or entitlement to damages.
Source excerpt
The High Court found that Rusanganwa Frederic was unjustly deprived of his inheritance rights in the prior judgment, as he was entitled to inherit his late father's share of the estate left by Ngirumpatse Paul. The court held that while he was not entitled to inherit as a child of Ngirumpatse Paul, he was entitled to his father's share by representation. The estate should be redistributed so that Rusanganwa receives his father's share, and the remaining portions are divided equally among Musabyimana Rebecca and Gihana Benjamin, representing their late father Nkerabigwi John. No damages were a…
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held it lacked jurisdiction because the disputed estate value was fixed at 61,000,000 Frw at first instance, below the 75,000,000 Frw threshold.
The Court of Appeal held that written testimonies offered after judgment were not new evidence and dismissed the revision application as inadmissible.
Explore more
