Rwanda Case Law

GAPCO vs IKIGO GISHINZWE IMIKORESHEREZE Y’UBUTAKA MU RWANDA N’ABANDI. [

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RADAA00010/2024/CA

The Court of Appeal found that GAPCO lost in both lower courts on the same essential ground: failure to prove legal ownership of the disputed land. Both courts determined that GAPCO's evidence (Acte de notoriété, administrative certificates) did not establish a valid transfer or registration of title. As the legal and factual issues were the same in both lower courts, the appeal was inadmissible under Article 52(3) of Law No 30/2018. The Court of Appeal therefore lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.

Source excerpt

• Land registration
• Ownership dispute
• Jurisdiction of appellate courts
• Burden of proof

Read case analysis

CONGRÉGATION DES SOEURS DES AMIES DES PAUVRES vs ASSOCIATION UMWANA NK’ABANDI

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RCAA 00004/2023CA

The Court of Appeal held that donor intent controlled ownership of disputed donated land, and reversed lower courts that relied only on sale-document wording.

• Ownership dispute
• Evidence assessment
• Charitable donations
• Land registration
• Land-ownership-dispute
• Evidence-law

Read case analysis

GACIRANE v DUSABE N’UNDI

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RC00004/2022/CA

The Court of Appeal held that the civil and criminal judgments conflicted over ownership of the disputed land, and the criminal judgment prevailed.

• Contradiction of judgments
• Mutation of land
• Ownership dispute
• Criminal conviction impact on civil rights
• Contradiction-of-judgments
• Land-ownership

Read case analysis

MUNYANEZA v AKARERE KA RULINDO NA RAZAK

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RADAA 00007/2022/CA

The Court of Appeal dismissed a compensation claim over land on which a petrol station was built, holding the claimant failed to prove ownership or entitlement.

• Burden of proof
• Emphyteutic lease
• Compensation for expropriation
• Standing to sue
• Ownership dispute
• Burden-of-proof

Read case analysis

MUNYANEZA v AKARERE KA RULINDO NA RAZAK

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RADAA 00007/2022/CA

The appellant failed to prove that Barikunde Joseph or his family had legal title or a valid lease to the disputed land, as prior judgments established ownership in Aslam Mohamed. Since the appellant already settled with the landowner and paid compensation, there is no basis for a further claim against the District. The District cannot be ordered to compensate for property it does not own or control.

Source excerpt

• Burden of proof
• Compensation for expropriation
• Lease agreements
• Ownership dispute
• Court costs

Read case analysis

MUKAYIRANGA n’undi v. BARUTWANAYO NKWAKUZI n’abandi

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RCAA 00005/2021/CA

The Court of Appeal held that land sold by a non-owner passed no title, but good-faith purchasers had to be compensated for their improvements before returning the property.

• Land sale
• Ownership dispute
• Good faith purchaser
• Restitution
• Compensation for improvements
• Land-sale

Read case analysis

MUKANDOLI v SENKWARE

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RCAA 00024/2020/CA

The Court of Appeal held that a house sale may be proved by oral testimony and other evidence, and found the disputed house belonged to Senkware.

• Ownership dispute
• Sale of immovable property
• Admissibility of evidence
• Burden of proof
• Property-law
• Evidence-law

Read case analysis

BAYINGANA NUNDI v NDABAMENYE Add

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

RS/INJUST/RC 00012/2019/SC

The Supreme Court of Rwanda reopened the hearing in a property dispute, citing unresolved questions about legal representation and new post-hearing material.

• Reopening of proceedings
• Mandate of legal representation
• Succession
• Auction sale
• Ownership dispute
• Civil-procedure

Read case analysis

Nyamwasa v Turikumwenimana

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RS/INJUST/RC/00006/2020/CA

The Court found that the 1998 sale agreement between Nyamwasa and Hakizimana, though lacking the original, was corroborated by credible witness testimony and forensic evidence discredited the 1999 agreement presented by Turikumwenimana. Therefore, Nyamwasa is the rightful purchaser. However, since Turikumwenimana possessed and improved the property for over 21 years, he is entitled to retain the house upon paying Nyamwasa compensation for the land value and reasonable rent for the period of occupation.

Source excerpt

• Evidence law
• Ownership dispute
• Real property
• Miscarriage of justice
• Compensation for improvements
• Burden of proof

Read case analysis

MUGISHA v MUNYANA NSANZIMANA

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

RS/INJUST/RC 00005/2020/SC

The Supreme Court held that the applicant lost in the lower courts on the same core issue—ownership of the disputed property—so the second appeal was inadmissible.

• Review on grounds of injustice
• Ownership dispute
• Admissibility of second appeal
• Burden of proof
• Compensation for legal costs
• Second-appeal-admissibility

Read case analysis