|
Title
|
Jurisdiction |
Date
|
|
|
 African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
29 November 2024 |
|
Court exercised discretion to reopen pleadings and granted the respondent an extension under Rules 46(3) and 90.
Procedure — Reopening pleadings; Extension of time — Rule 46(3) Rules of Court; Inherent powers — Rule 90; Withdrawal of Article 34(6) Declaration — effect on pending cases.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
29 November 2024 |
|
Court reopened pleadings and granted the State a 30-day extension to file its Response pursuant to its discretionary powers.
Procedure – Reopening pleadings – Rule 46(3) Rules of Court; Extension of time – discretion to grant – Rule 90 and inherent powers; Administration of justice; Effect of withdrawal of Article 34(6) Declaration on pending cases.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
29 November 2024 |
|
Court reopened pleadings and granted the respondent 30 days to file its Response, exercising discretion under Rules 46(3) and 90.
Procedure – Reopening pleadings; Extension of time – Rule 46(3) and Rule 90 (inherent powers) – Respondent’s restructuring and evidence collection as grounds for extension – Effect of withdrawal of Article 34(6) Declaration on pending cases.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
29 November 2024 |
|
|
Tanzania
|
19 December 2022 |
Human rights and fundamental freedoms - right to privacy, freedom from torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment
Human rights and fundamental freedoms - the right of prisoners to humane living conditions and dignified treatment - the right to consent and privacy in HIV and AIDS testing |
Tanzania
|
19 December 2022 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
The Commission struck out the complaint for lack of diligent prosecution due to non-submission of admissibility arguments.
Human Rights – African Commission procedure – Admissibility – Diligent prosecution – Complaint struck out for failure to submit on admissibility within extended deadlines.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
A complaint alleging gross human rights violations was struck out due to the complainant's failure to prosecute the case diligently.
African Commission – Communication procedure – Diligent prosecution – Admissibility – Failure to submit on admissibility – Striking out of communication
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
A communication was struck out for lack of diligent prosecution following failure to submit admissibility arguments as required.
Human rights – African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights – admissibility – procedural default – communication struck out for want of diligent prosecution.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
18 October 2018 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
6 March 2018 |
|
A complaint was struck out for failure to submit admissibility arguments within the required period, precluding consideration of allegations.
African Commission procedure – communications – admissibility – failure of complainant to submit required arguments on admissibility within prescribed period – strike-out for lack of diligent prosecution.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
6 March 2018 |
|
The Commission struck out the communication due to the complainants' failure to submit admissibility arguments as required by its rules.
African Charter – communications procedure – admissibility – failure to submit arguments – strike out for lack of diligent prosecution – procedural compliance
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
6 March 2018 |
|
A complaint was struck out for lack of diligent prosecution due to the complainant's failure to submit admissibility arguments.
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights – Procedure – Communication struck out for lack of diligent prosecution – Failure to submit arguments on admissibility within prescribed time and absence of extension request.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
6 March 2018 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
24 February 2014 |
|
A Reference challenging state action under the EAC Treaty was dismissed as time-barred for failure to comply with strict limitation periods.
Regional integration law – EAC Treaty – jurisdiction of East African Court of Justice – time limitation of References under Article 30(2) – whether inclusion of human rights complaints removes EACJ’s interpretive jurisdiction – strict enforcement of statutory time limits for bringing action – Treaty interpretation and application.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
24 February 2014 |
|
The court dismissed a reference as time-barred under the EAC Treaty, refusing to extend the two-month statutory period.
Regional integration law – East African Community – Jurisdiction of EACJ – Treaty interpretation – Reference procedure – Time-bar under Article 30(2) – No judicial discretion to extend limitation period.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
24 February 2014 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
24 May 2013 |
|
A partner state’s denial of entry to EAC citizens must comply with due process, non-discrimination, and other requirements under the Treaty.
East African Community law – free movement of persons – due process – non-discrimination – sovereignty of partner states – supremacy of community law – obligations of partner states under the EAC Treaty and Protocol – interplay between national law and EAC obligations – right to redress for citizens of partner states.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
24 May 2013 |
|
Partner States must comply with EAC Treaty and Protocol obligations when denying entry to citizens of other Partner States.
East African Community law – Regional integration – Free movement of persons – Sovereignty of Partner States – Due process rights – Non-discrimination – Supremacy of Community law over national law – Immigration and prohibited immigrants – Denial of entry without reasons violates Treaty obligations.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
24 May 2013 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
15 April 2013 |
|
Strict time limits under the EAC Treaty preclude the doctrine of continuing violations from extending limitation periods for References.
Community law – Limitation periods – Article 30(2) of the EAC Treaty – No exception for continuing violations – Court lacks power to waive two-month time limit – Legal certainty.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
15 April 2013 |
|
A reference alleging continuing Treaty violation is time-barred if filed beyond two months from the initial act’s occurrence or awareness.
Regional integration law – Computation of limitation period – Article 30(2) of East African Community Treaty – Whether two-month time limit applies to continuing violations – Interpretation of limitation period and scope for exceptions – Principle of legal certainty in regional integration disputes.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
15 April 2013 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
14 February 2013 |
|
The court stayed proceedings in a reference pending the outcome of an appeal on similar facts to avoid conflicting decisions.
Civil procedure – stay of proceedings – inherent powers of the court – parallel legal actions arising from similar facts – avoidance of conflicting judgments – balance of convenience in granting a stay – impact of pending appeal on current proceedings.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
14 February 2013 |
|
Court stayed proceedings in a related reference to await the outcome of an appeal with overlapping facts and legal questions.
Civil procedure – stay of proceedings – inherent jurisdiction – overlapping cases – potential for conflicting decisions – effect of appeal decision on pending proceedings – interest of justice and judicial economy.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
14 February 2013 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
1 June 2012 |
|
Detention without charge for five months and lack of due process breached Rwanda's obligations under the EAC Treaty.
Regional integration law – Good governance – Rule of law – Human rights – EAC Treaty – Prolonged incommunicado detention – Jurisdiction of EACJ – Exhaustion of local remedies – Limitation period – Interpretation and application of Treaty provisions by EACJ.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
1 June 2012 |
|
The EACJ has jurisdiction to interpret the Treaty where a Partner State breaches good governance principles, even if human rights are implicated.
Regional integration law – jurisdiction of the East African Court of Justice – interpretation and application of EAC Treaty provisions – fundamental principles of good governance, rule of law, and human rights – exhaustion of local remedies – time-bar for lodging references – arbitrary detention by a partner state – cause of action under regional treaty distinguished from ordinary human rights claims.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
1 June 2012 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
15 March 2012 |
|
A Reference alleging Treaty breaches was struck out as time-barred under Article 30(2) of the EAC Treaty.
Regional integration law – jurisdiction of the East African Court of Justice – interpretation and application of Treaty – human rights allegations – time limit for instituting References – Article 30(2) of the EAC Treaty – proper procedure for preliminary objections.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
15 March 2012 |
|
A Reference alleging Treaty breaches was struck out as time-barred since it was filed beyond the EACJ's two-month limitation period.
Regional integration law – East African Court of Justice – reference for interpretation of EAC Treaty – jurisdiction limited to breaches of Treaty provisions and not direct enforcement of human rights – limitation period for filing references – strict two-month deadline under Article 30(2) – no implied power to extend period or recognize continuing violation exception – proper procedure for preliminary objections.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
15 March 2012 |
|
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
11 November 2007 |
|
A Partner State's disregard of court orders and interference with judicial independence violates the rule of law under the EAC Treaty.
Regional integration law – East African Community Treaty – Rule of law – interpretation of Treaty provisions – re-arrest and detention of persons granted bail – independence of the judiciary – jurisdiction of the EACJ – res judicata – powers and duties of the Secretary General under the Treaty.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
11 November 2007 |
|
State interference with judicial decisions by re-arresting bailed individuals contravenes the rule of law under the EAC Treaty.
Regional integration law – Rule of law – Treaty interpretation – Independence of judiciary – Enforcement of court orders – State action undermining judicial decisions – Duties of regional Secretariat – Investigatory obligations under the Treaty – Costs.
|
African Regional Bodies
· African Union (AU)
|
11 November 2007 |
