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 Court held Tanzania violated the Applicant’s rights to life and dignity in relation to a mandatory death sentence and hanging, but rejected other claims.
The African Court found this human rights application inadmissible because the applicant had not exhausted local remedies, though it confirmed jurisdiction.
The African Court found Tanzania violated the Applicant’s right to free legal assistance in a rape case, but rejected claims about the conviction and sentence.
The African Court held it had jurisdiction but found the application inadmissible because the applicant did not exhaust local remedies, including cassation.
The application is inadmissible because the Applicant failed to exhaust available and effective local remedies as required by Article 56(5) of the Charter and Rule 50(2)(e) of the Rules; the Applicant could have pursued direct action before domestic courts under Tunisian law.
Source excerpt
The application was declared inadmissible because the applicant failed to exhaust local remedies as required by Article 56(5) of the Charter and Rule 50(2)(e) of the Rules. The applicant did not pursue available remedies before the Constitutional Court, and did not demonstrate that the appeal proceedings were unduly prolonged due to State conduct. The Court found it had jurisdiction but dismissed the application for non-exhaustion of local remedies.
Source excerpt
The application was declared inadmissible because the applicant failed to exhaust available domestic remedies, specifically by not pursuing the Constitutional Court of Benin, and did not demonstrate that the judicial delay in the appeal process was attributable to the State. The Court found no evidence of abnormal prolongation caused by the State or of unavailability or ineffectiveness of domestic remedies.
Source excerpt
The application is inadmissible because the applicant failed to exhaust available domestic remedies, specifically the right to appeal the first instance judgment, as required by Article 56 of the Charter and Rule 50(2)(e) of the Rules.
Source excerpt
The applicant did not exhaust available and effective domestic remedies, specifically the cassation appeal, and neither lack of counsel nor ignorance of the remedy excuses this failure. The application is therefore inadmissible.
Source excerpt
The applicant failed to exhaust available and effective domestic remedies, specifically before the Constitutional Court of Benin, and did not demonstrate abnormal prolongation of proceedings attributable to the state; therefore, the application is irreceivable.
Source excerpt
Explore more
