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.
Tanzania decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The EACJ Appellate Division partly allowed Burundi’s appeal, upheld jurisdiction, found the title cancellation unlawful, but held the trial court went beyond the claim and remitted the matter.
The EACJ held that RUZIZI S.A.’s Reference was filed one day late under Article 30(2) of the Treaty and dismissed it as time-barred.
The Respondent State violated Articles 4, 7(1)(a), 16, 24, and 9(1) of the African Charter by failing to prevent the dumping of toxic waste, inadequately investigating and prosecuting those responsible, failing to provide effective remedies and compensation to all victims, not ensuring adequate medical care and information, and not fully remediating the environmental damage. The State’s actions and omissions breached its obligations to respect, protect, and fulfil the rights to life, health, environment, information, and effective remedy. The compensation programme and remedial measures were…
Source excerpt
TAZARA is a public entity as it is a statutory corporation wholly owned and controlled by the governments of Tanzania and Zambia, established through domestication of a bilateral treaty. The CMA lacked jurisdiction to entertain the complaint filed after the enactment of the Written Laws Miscellaneous Amendment Act No. 13 of 2016, which requires exhaustion of remedies under the Public Service Act. Procedural amendments apply to actions filed after their commencement, regardless of when the cause of action arose.
Source excerpt
The Court found that the Respondent States did not individually or collectively violate the right to self-determination of the Sahrawi people under Article 20 of the Charter. The admission of Morocco to the AU was a decision of the AU Assembly, not attributable to individual States. There was no evidence of wrongful acts or omissions by Respondent States amounting to a breach of their obligations under the Charter. The Court held that the Respondent States' support for diplomatic efforts and lack of specific measures did not constitute a violation, and no causal link was established between t…
Source excerpt
The EACJ dismissed a challenge to Burundi’s 2015 election dispute, holding it could not review a national constitutional court decision and that one claim was time-barred.
The EACJ Appellate Division dismissed an appeal challenging 13th Summit directives and a Protocol on Immunities and Privileges as consistent with the EAC Treaty.
The EACJ has jurisdiction to interpret the EAC Treaty, including determining whether Rwanda's detention of Lieutenant Colonel Ngabo without trial for five months breached Articles 6(d) and 7(2). The detention was unlawful under Rwandan law and violated the Treaty’s fundamental and operational principles. The Reference was filed within time due to the continuous nature of the detention, and exhaustion of local remedies was not required. The 1st Respondent was not in breach as he had no prior notice. The Applicant is entitled to a declaration and costs against the 2nd Respondent.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal quashed High Court proceedings for lack of proof of service before ex parte orders, set aside the judgment and decree, and ordered a fresh hearing.
The Court has jurisdiction to interpret and apply the Treaty even if the reference includes allegations of human rights violations. The 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Respondents were wrongly joined as they are not Partner States or Community institutions. There is no cause of action against the 5th Respondent. Rule 24 was complied with after the claimant filed its registration certificate. The reference is not time barred as the alleged violations constitute a continuous chain of events.
Source excerpt
Explore more
