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 lacks personal jurisdiction because Kenya has not deposited the Article 34(6) Declaration, making the application inadmissible regardless of alleged violations.
Source excerpt
The African Court held that it had jurisdiction over Haruna Juma’s application but found it inadmissible because it was filed outside a reasonable time.
The African Court held that it had jurisdiction but declared the application inadmissible for failure to file within a reasonable time after local remedies were exhausted.
The African Court held that Mali did not violate former workers’ rights to fair hearing, equality, non-discrimination, impartial tribunal, or judicial independence.
The application was declared inadmissible because it was not filed within a reasonable time after exhaustion of domestic remedies. The applicant failed to provide sufficient justification or evidence that his personal circumstances prevented timely filing. The delay of over six years was not reasonable under Article 56(6) of the Charter and Rule 50(2)(f) of the Rules.
Source excerpt
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 application was not filed within a reasonable time as required by Article 56(6) of the Charter and Rule 50(2)(f) of the Rules. The applicant failed to justify the delay of over six years after the respondent's declaration allowing individual applications. Therefore, the application is inadmissible.
Source excerpt
The African Court awarded reparations to Mgosi Mwita Makungu for Tanzania’s failure to provide court records needed to appeal his conviction.
The applicant failed to provide further particulars, evidence, or submissions despite repeated invitations and extensions by the Court. The respondent also failed to respond. The Court determined that, under Rule 65(1), further examination of the application was no longer justified and ordered its removal from the roll.
Source excerpt
The African Court held Layford Makene’s application inadmissible for failure to file within a reasonable time, despite rejecting the jurisdiction and non-exhaustion objections.
Explore more
