Wakilii

Ajavon v Republic of Benin (Application No. 002-2021)

African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights · [2021] AfCHPR 53 · 2021 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for provisional measures to stay execution of three Supreme Court of Benin judgments pending determination of main application on merits
Decision
Provisional measures granted by majority decision (6 votes to 5); execution of three Supreme Court judgments stayed pending determination of main application on merits

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights held that it has prima facie jurisdiction and that the conditions for granting provisional measures under Article 27(2) of the Protocol are met. The Court ordered the stay of execution of three Supreme Court of Benin judgments concerning tax adjustments against companies in which the applicant is a shareholder, finding that execution would cause imminent irreparable harm to the applicant and his family who were not parties to the underlying tax proceedings, and that seizure of their assets would deprive them of means of subsistence.

Outcome

Provisional measures granted by majority decision (6 votes to 5); execution of three Supreme Court judgments stayed pending determination of main application on merits

Facts

The applicant, a Beninese businessman residing in France as a political refugee, is a shareholder in three companies (COMON SA, JLR SA Unipersonnelle, and l'Elite SCI) that were subject to tax adjustments by Benin authorities. The Supreme Court of Benin dismissed appeals for annulment of these tax adjustments in three judgments rendered on 5 November 2020 and 17 December 2020. The applicant alleges that the tax proceedings violated his rights to defence and equality before the law, and that he did not receive the public prosecutor's submissions for comment in violation of procedural law. The applicant had previously obtained a judgment on reparations from the African Court in Application No. 013/2017 ordering Benin to lift seizures of his accounts and property in connection with the same tax adjustments, but Benin had not complied. The applicant sought provisional measures to prevent confiscation and sale of his assets, those of his family, and those of the companies pending determination of his main application.

Issues

  1. Whether the Court has prima facie jurisdiction to hear the application for provisional measures.
  2. Whether the conditions of urgency, extreme gravity, and imminent irreparable harm are met to warrant the grant of provisional measures.
  3. Whether the execution of the three Supreme Court of Benin judgments should be stayed pending determination of the main application on merits.

Orders

  • Stay of execution ordered in respect of Supreme Court of Benin Judgment No. 209/CA (COMON SA v Ministry of Economy and Finance and two others) of 5 November 2020.
  • Stay of execution ordered in respect of Supreme Court of Benin Judgment No. 210/CA (Société JLR SA Unipersonnelle v Ministry of Economy and Finance) of 5 November 2020.
  • Stay of execution ordered in respect of Supreme Court of Benin Judgment No. 231/CA (Société l'Elite SCI v Ministry of Economy and Finance and two others) of 17 December 2020.
  • Respondent State to report to the Court within thirty (30) days from notification on measures taken to implement the order.

Rules and key headnotes

Human Rights — Provisional Measures — Prima Facie Jurisdiction
In matters of provisional measures under Article 27(2) of the Protocol to the African Charter, the Court need not be satisfied that it has jurisdiction on the merits but merely that it has prima facie jurisdiction.
Human Rights — Withdrawal of Declaration — Effect on Pending Cases
The withdrawal of a State's declaration under Article 34(6) of the Protocol accepting the Court's jurisdiction to receive applications from individuals has no retroactive effect on pending cases nor any impact on cases filed before the withdrawal takes effect.
Human Rights — Provisional Measures — Conditions for Grant
Provisional measures may be granted under Article 27(2) of the Protocol where there is urgency and extreme gravity, meaning an irreparable and imminent risk being caused before the Court issues final judgment, and where there is a reasonable probability of irreparable harm occurring given the personal context and situation of the applicant.
Human Rights — Provisional Measures — Imminent Risk
Where judgments are final and binding with no obstacle to their execution, there exists a real and imminent risk that execution may take place at any time before the Court renders its final decision, thereby satisfying the condition of urgency and extreme gravity for provisional measures.
Tax Law — Corporate Personality — Separation of Shareholder and Company Assets
A public limited liability company has its own legal personality separate from its shareholders, and the separation of property rights as between company and shareholder means that forced recovery of company debts, including tax debts, cannot in principle be enforced against the personal assets of individual shareholders.
Human Rights — Provisional Measures — Irreparable Harm to Non-Parties
Where seizures for enforcement of judgments would deprive an applicant and family members of means of subsistence, and neither the applicant nor family members were parties to the proceedings that led to the judgments being enforced, such seizures will cause irreparable harm warranting provisional measures.
Human Rights — Provisional Measures — Purpose and Effect
Provisional measures are preventive in nature, granted to preserve the status quo pending consideration on the merits, and do not prejudge the Court's findings on jurisdiction, admissibility, or the merits of the application.

Legislation cited (7)

  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 3(1)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 3(2)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7(1)(c)
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 3(1)
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 27(2)
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 34(6)
  • Code of Civil, Commercial, Social, Administrative and Accounting Procedure (CPCCSAC) Article 937(1)

Cases cited (8)

  • Ingabire Victoire Umuhoza v Republic of Rwanda (Order of 3 June 2016) 1 AfCLR 540
  • Houngue Eric Noudehouenou v Republic of Benin (Application No. 003/2020)
  • Ghati Mwita v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 012/2019)
  • Niederost-Hubert v Switzerland (18 February 1997)
  • Sébastien Germain Ajavon v Republic of Benin (Application No. 013/2017)
  • Komi Koutche v Republic of Benin (Application No. 013/2020)
  • Barcelona Traction Light Power Company Limited (Belgium v Spain) (5 February 1970)
  • Alfred Agbesi Woyome v Republic of Ghana (24 November 2017) 2 AfCLR 213

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Ajavon v Republic of Benin (Application No. 002-2021) [2021] AfCHPR 53 (29 March 2021)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.