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 African Court held that Tanzania’s mandatory death penalty and hanging as a method of execution violated the rights to life and dignity.
The applicant is entitled to bail as the offence is bailable and bail is a constitutional right, provided statutory and court-imposed conditions are met.
Source excerpt
The African Court dismissed all interim relief requests in a Tunisian provisional-measures case, finding the election-related requests would prejudice the merits.
The East African Court of Justice found Rwanda’s border closures, movement restrictions, and denial of entry to Ugandan traders breached the Treaty and Common Market Protocol.
The Court found no real and imminent risk of irreparable harm connected to the alleged rights that would justify granting provisional measures. The requests either related to the merits or lacked sufficient justification. The Court therefore rejected all requests for provisional measures.
Source excerpt
Requested provisional measures (halting elections, annulling acts, compelling medical examination) are not sufficiently linked to alleged rights violations and would prejudge the merits; urgency and irreparable harm not established.
Source excerpt
The application is inadmissible because the applicant failed to exhaust available and effective domestic remedies before the national courts of Benin. The proceedings before the relevant courts were ongoing at the time of filing, and the applicant did not demonstrate that remedies were unduly prolonged or unavailable. The political context and alleged lack of judicial independence did not exempt the applicant from the exhaustion requirement. The language used in the application was not found to be disparaging.
Source excerpt
The application is inadmissible because the applicant failed to exhaust available and effective domestic remedies as required by Article 56(5) of the Charter; the ongoing national proceedings had not been unduly prolonged, and the applicant did not demonstrate that remedies were unavailable or ineffective due to the political context or judicial bias.
Source excerpt
The continued retention of the appellant's passport by the 1st and 2nd respondents for over a year without sufficient justification or communication was unreasonable and infringed the appellant's right to freedom of movement; while the initial seizure for investigation was lawful, the prolonged delay was not governed by a rule of reason and thus not justified under the law.
Source excerpt
The African Court reopened pleadings in the reparations phase after finding exceptional circumstances, including communication difficulties and a change of counsel.
Explore more
