Gombert v Republic of Côte d’Ivoire (Application No. 038-2016)
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 had jurisdiction but declared the application inadmissible on the ground that the dispute had been previously settled by the ECOWAS Court of Justice in accordance with the principles of the African Charter. The Court found that the parties, claims, and subject matter were identical to those adjudicated by ECOWAS, satisfying the conditions for prior settlement under Article 56(7) of the Charter.
Outcome
Application declared inadmissible on the ground of prior settlement by ECOWAS Court of Justice
Facts
The applicant, a French national and company director, entered into an agreement in 1999 to purchase an industrial citrus plantation in Côte d'Ivoire for 200 million CFA Francs. The vendor received 160 million CFA Francs but refused to sign the deed of sale. The applicant filed proceedings in Ivorian courts to compel completion. Between 2000 and 2014, multiple decisions were rendered by various Ivorian courts including the Divo Court, Daloa Court of Appeal, Abidjan Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court. The applicant, dissatisfied with some decisions, brought the matter before the ECOWAS Court of Justice, which dismissed his claims in two judgments dated 25 April 2015 and 17 May 2016. The applicant then filed an application with the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights on 11 July 2016, alleging violations of his fair trial rights by the Ivorian courts.
Issues
- Whether the application is admissible having regard to exhaustion of local remedies.
- Whether the application was filed within a reasonable time after exhaustion of local remedies.
- Whether the dispute has been previously settled by the ECOWAS Court of Justice within the meaning of Article 56(7) of the African Charter.
Orders
- Court has jurisdiction.
- Inadmissibility objection for non-exhaustion of local remedies dismissed.
- Inadmissibility objection for failure to submit the application within a reasonable time dismissed.
- Inadmissibility objection on the grounds that the dispute has been settled within the meaning of Article 56(7) of the Charter upheld.
- Application declared inadmissible.
- Each party to bear its own costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (26)
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 3
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7(1)
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7(1)(d)
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 8
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56(5)
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56(6)
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56(7)
- Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 6(2)
- Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 22
- Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 28(7)
- 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)
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 2(2)
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 3(4)
- Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 7
- Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 8
- Rules of Court Rule 8(2)
- Rules of Court Rule 30
- Rules of Court Rule 35(3)
- Rules of Court Rule 39
- Rules of Court Rule 39(1)
- Rules of Court Rule 40
- Rules of Court Rule 40(6)
- Rules of Court Rule 40(7)
- Rules of Court Rule 60(5)
Cases cited (10)
- Norbert Zongo et al v Burkina Faso (Application No. 013-2011)
- APDH v Côte d'Ivoire (Application No. 001-2014)
- Alex Thomas v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 005-2013)
- Kennedy Owino Onyachi and Charles John Mwanini Njoka v Tanzania (Application No. 003-2015)
- Luke Munyandu Tembani and Benjamin John Freeth v Angola and thirteen Others (Communication No. 409-12)
- James Katabazi et al v Secretary General of the East African Community and Another (Reference No. 1-2007)
- Velásquez-Rodríguez v Honduras (Application No. 7920)
- Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia-Herzegovina v. Serbia-and-Montenegro) Judgment of 26 February 2007, ICJ., Collection 2007
- Société AGRILAND v The State of Côte d'Ivoire (Judgment No. ECW/CCJ/JUD)
- ECW/CCJ/RUL/08/16 of 17 May, 2016
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.