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 Mali did not violate former workers’ rights to fair hearing, equality, non-discrimination, impartial tribunal, or judicial independence.
The Court found that the applicants had access to national courts, exhausted all remedies, and that the duration and conduct of proceedings were justified by the complexity and number of parties. No evidence was provided of discrimination, unequal treatment, or lack of judicial independence or impartiality. The Court concluded that the respondent state did not violate any of the applicants’ rights under the African Charter.
Source excerpt
The Court found that the Supreme Court of Malawi acted within its competence in annulling the election and ordering a new one based on evidence of irregularities, and that the applicants failed to demonstrate any manifest error, discrimination, or denial of fair hearing. The respondent State did not violate the applicants’ rights under Articles 3(2), 7(1), 7(1)(a), or 13(1) of the African Charter.
Source excerpt
The African Court dismissed an application for provisional measures, finding that the applicant did not show the urgency needed to stop execution of a Benin civil judgment.
The applicant failed to demonstrate that the civil judgment is executable, as it is neither provisionally enforceable nor proven insusceptible to suspensive appeal. Therefore, the risk of imminent irreparable harm is not established, and the urgency condition for provisional measures is not met.
Source excerpt
The applicants failed to demonstrate that the holding of the by-election would cause irreparable harm; urgency was established due to the imminent election date, but the alleged harms (financial loss, reputational risk, legal costs) are inherent to electoral and legal processes and do not meet the threshold for irreparable harm required for provisional measures.
Source excerpt
The deprivation of the applicant's Tanzanian nationality was arbitrary, lacking sufficient legal and evidentiary basis, and failed to provide procedural safeguards or judicial remedies, in violation of international human rights standards. The subsequent expulsion was also arbitrary and resulted in statelessness, compounding the violations. The applicant was denied access to a court to challenge these decisions, breaching the right to a fair hearing.
Source excerpt
The Court found that the applicant was arbitrarily deprived of his Tanzanian nationality, as the state failed to provide convincing evidence to rebut the applicant's long-standing status as a national, supported by official documents and community testimony. The deprivation was not based on clear legal grounds, lacked procedural safeguards, and the state failed to conduct a DNA test that could have resolved factual disputes. The expulsion was arbitrary, as it was based on the unlawful deprivation of nationality and denied the applicant the right to return to his country. The applicant was als…
Source excerpt
The Commission held that the complainants failed to exhaust the relevant and effective local remedy, namely constitutional review before the House of Federation and Council of Constitutional Inquiry, which has exclusive jurisdiction over constitutional disputes in Ethiopia. The Commission found that this remedy was available, effective, and sufficient for the type of complaint raised, and that the complainants’ failure to pursue it rendered the communication inadmissible under Article 56(5) of the Charter.
Source excerpt
Explore more
