Wakilii

Noudehouenou v Republic of Benin (Application No. 032-2020)

African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights · [2021] AfCHPR 55 · 2021 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for provisional measures to stay execution of a domestic court judgment pending determination of the main application alleging human rights violations
Decision
Application for provisional measures dismissed; main application remains pending

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 dismissed an application for provisional measures seeking a stay of execution of a domestic court judgment. The Court held that it had prima facie jurisdiction despite Benin's withdrawal of its declaration accepting individual applications, as the withdrawal had no retroactive effect on pending cases. However, the Court found that the condition of urgency was not met because the domestic judgment was not binding — it was subject to appeal and no certificate of non-appeal had been produced to establish that no suspensive remedy remained available.

Outcome

Application for provisional measures dismissed; main application remains pending

Facts

The applicant, a national of Benin, sought provisional measures to stay execution of a judgment delivered by the Cotonou Court of First Instance on 5 June 2018 in a civil land dispute. The applicant had voluntarily intervened as a third party in proceedings between the Houngue Gandji group and others concerning land ownership. The judgment dismissed the applicant's intervention and ordered him to pay costs. The applicant alleged he was never served with the judgment and only learned of its existence on 7 September 2020 through a third party. He filed the main application on 15 October 2020 alleging violations of his rights to property, equality before the law, and a fair hearing. On 16 December 2020, he filed this application for provisional measures, arguing that execution of the judgment would cause him irreparable harm. The Respondent State did not file a response to the application for provisional measures.

Issues

  1. Whether the Court has prima facie jurisdiction to hear the application for provisional measures given the Respondent State's withdrawal of its declaration under Article 34(6) of the Protocol.
  2. Whether the conditions for granting provisional measures under Article 27(2) of the Protocol — extreme gravity or urgency and irreparable harm — are satisfied.
  3. Whether the judgment of the Cotonou Court of First Instance is binding and its execution imminent such that urgency exists.

Orders

  • Dismisses the request for provisional measures.

Rules and key headnotes

Human Rights — Jurisdiction — Prima Facie Jurisdiction for Provisional Measures
In matters of provisional measures, the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights need not be satisfied that it has jurisdiction on the merits of the case but merely that it has prima facie jurisdiction.
Human Rights — Jurisdiction — Effect of Withdrawal of Declaration
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 and has no bearing on new cases filed before the withdrawal comes into effect one year after its filing.
Civil Procedure — Provisional Measures — Conditions for Grant
Under Article 27(2) of the Protocol, provisional measures may be adopted only in cases of extreme gravity and urgency and when necessary to avoid irreparable harm to persons. These conditions are cumulative, and where one is absent, the measure requested cannot be ordered.
Civil Procedure — Provisional Measures — Urgency — Imminence of Execution
Urgency for purposes of provisional measures means an irreparable and imminent risk that irreparable harm will be caused before the Court renders its final judgment. The risk must be real and not purely hypothetical. Urgency must result from the imminence of execution of the impugned judgment, which can be inferred from its binding nature.
Civil Procedure — Enforceability of Judgments — Binding Nature
An adversarial judgment rendered at first instance is binding only if its execution is temporary or if it is established that it is not subject to suspensive remedies. Where an appeal lies and no certificate of non-appeal has been produced, the judgment is not binding and the risk of harm from its execution is not imminent.

Legislation cited (16)

  • 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)
  • Rules of Court Rule 49(1)
  • Rules of Court Rule 51
  • Civil Procedure Code (Benin) Article 547
  • Civil Procedure Code (Benin) Article 570
  • Civil Procedure Code (Benin) Article 571
  • Civil Procedure Code (Benin) Article 572
  • Civil Procedure Code (Benin) Article 577
  • Civil Procedure Code (Benin) Article 621
  • Civil Procedure Code (Benin) Article 708
  • Land Code (Benin) Article 34
  • Property Law (Benin) Article 528(1)
  • Property Law (Benin) Article 528(5)
  • Property Law (Benin) Article 530

Cases cited (7)

  • Ingabire Victoire Umuhoza v Republic of Rwanda (Order of 3 June 2016)
  • Houngue Eric Noudehouenou v Republic of Benin (Application No. 003/2020)
  • Ghati Mwita v Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 012/2019)
  • Sébastien Ajavon v Republic of Benin (Application No. 062/2019)
  • Houngue Eric Noudehouenou v Republic of Benin (Application No. 004/2020)
  • Houngue Eric Noudehouenou v Republic of Benin (Application No. 003/2020)
  • Houngue Eric Noudehouenou v Republic of Benin (Application No. 003/2020)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Noudehouenou v Republic of Benin (Application No. 032-2020) [2021] AfCHPR 55 (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.