Rwanda Case Law

Re UWOMBONYE

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

RS/INCONST/SPEC00002/2023/SC

The Court held that the challenged provisions of Law No 83/2013 do not violate Article 15 of the Constitution. The transitional exemption for advocates and judicial defenders with six years of experience was a legitimate legislative choice to address those already practicing under the old law, and judges and prosecutors were not similarly situated. The requirement to pass a test for admission to the Bar Association is justified by the specialized nature of the legal profession and does not constitute unequal treatment, as different professions may be subject to different entry requirements ba…

Source excerpt

• Equality before the law
• Admission to legal profession
• Judicial review
• Transitional provisions

Read case analysis

Re UWOMBONYE (INCONST) 2024

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

RS/INCONST/SPEC00002/2023/SC

The Supreme Court held that the challenged provisions do not violate the constitutional principle of equality before the law. The differentiation in requirements for entry into the legal profession is justified by the unique nature of the profession and the need for specific qualifications. Transitional provisions for those already practicing are legitimate and do not amount to unconstitutional discrimination. The Court also lacks jurisdiction to review the constitutionality of internal regulations.

Source excerpt

• Equality before the law
• Regulation of legal profession
• Transitional provisions
• Judicial review

Read case analysis

RWANDA DEVELOPMENT BOARD (RDB) v. NANIYA SEBIRIBIRI N’ABANDI

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

RCAA 00016/2020/CA

The Court of Appeal held that the old civil code applied because the harmful act and claim arose before repeal, and it dismissed RDB’s appeal as inadmissible.

• Retroactivity of law
• Employer liability
• Abrogation of statutes
• Transitional provisions
• Civil damages
• Retroactivity-of-law

Read case analysis