All Posts

አንቀጽ 2084 ሁለት የሞተር ተሽከርካሪዎች እርስ በእርስ በሚጋጩበት ጊዜ የሚኖረውን የፍትሐ ብሔር ኃላፊነትና የጉዳት ክፍፍል የሚደነግግ ልዩ ድንጋጌ ነው። ድንጋጌው የተሽከርካሪ ባለቤቶች ባላቸው ጥብቅ ኃላፊነት (strict liability) እና በአሽከርካሪዎች ጥፋት (fault) መካከል ያለውን ሚዛን ይጠብቃል። 1.ዋና ዋና የሕግ ድንጋጌዎችና አካላት ሀ.እኩል አስተዋጽኦ የማድረግ የሕግ ግምት (ንኡስ አንቀጽ 1) ሕጉ፡ ሁለት የሞተር ተሽከርካሪዎች በሚጋጩበት ጊዜ፣ እያንዳንዱ ተሽከርካሪ ለአደጋው መከሰት እኩል አስተዋጽኦ እንዳደረገ በሕግ ይገመታል። አተገባበር፡ አደጋው እንዴት እንደደረሰ የሚያስረዳ በቂ ማስረጃ በሌለበት ጊዜ፣ ፍርድ ቤቱ የትኛው አሽከርካሪ ጥፋተኛ እንደሆነ ለመገመት ሳይቸገር ወይም ክሱን ውድቅ ሳያደርግ፣ ይህንን የሕግ ግምት በመጠቀ

Decision No. 278483 (Tir 28, 2018 E.C.) Theme of the Dispute The dispute concerns whether an employer-employee contractual relationship existed between the applicant (Physical Risk Solution PLC) and the respondents, and whether the applicant was obligated to continue employing the respondents after taking over a security service contract from another company. The core issue revolves around the legal consequences of business transfer versus mere contractual succession. Undispu

1. የሰበር መዝገብ ቁጥር 72304 (የውሳኔ ቀን፡ ሰኔ 18 ቀን 2004 ዓ.ም.) የክርክር ርዕሰ ጉዳይ ጉዳዩ *በአንድ የወንጀል ድርጊት ሁለት ጊዜ የመከሰስና የመቀጣትን** (የድጋሚ ቅጣት ክልከላ) ሕጋዊነትን እንዲሁም ለዚህ መሠረታዊ መብት መተግበር መሟላት ያለባቸውን ሕጋዊ መስፈርቶች የሚመለከት ነው። ### አጭር ያልተከራከሩ/የተረጋገጡ/ እውነታዎች ማጠቃለያ: ተጠሪ (ተማሪ ሐጎስ ወልደሚካኤል) የካቲት 22 ቀን 2002 ዓ.ም. ከቀኑ 8፡00 ሰዓት ላይ ድንጋይ ወርውሮ ሟች ግደይ ገብረየሱስ ጭንቅላታቸውንና አከርካሪያቸውን በመምታት ጉዳት አድርሶባቸዋል። ዐቃቤ ሕግ መጀመሪያ ላይ የካቲት 24 ቀን 2002 ዓ.ም. ተጠሪው ቀላል የአካል ማጉደል ወንጀል (በወንጀል ሕግ አንቀጽ 556(2)(ሀ) መሠረት) ፈጽሟል ብሎ በወንበርታ ወረዳ ፍርድ ቤት ከስሶት ተጠ

Waliigaltee

1. Cassation Decision Case No. 244308 Date of Ruling: Yekatit 30, 2018 E.C.. Theme of Disputes: The dispute centers on the statute of limitations (prescription) applicable to claims for the recovery of urban land holding rights. It specifically addresses whether a claim to regain possession of urban land from an unauthorized occupant is imprescriptible, like a house ownership claim, or subject to the general 10-year limitation period. Undisputed Facts: The legal conflict invo

Cassation Decision No. 57632 dated Tahsas 25, 2003 E.C. Theme of disputes: Criminal prosecution for intentional homicide arising from the alleged murder of artist Grum Tesfaye. The central dispute revolves around the procedural validity of a conviction rendered on appeal when the accused was absent, and the extent of the Cassation Division’s review powers over such a judgment. Undisputed facts: The Federal High Court acquitted the accused in absentia after the Public Prosecut

1. Cassation Decision No. 213837 Date of Ruling: Tikimt 8, 2017 (October 15, 2024) Theme of the Dispute This cassation case involved a matrimonial dispute concerning the dissolution of marriage. The appellant challenged the lower courts' decisions regarding whether a valid marriage continued to exist between the parties after an initial dissolution of marriage by divorce. The central issue was whether the parties had validly reconstituted their marriage following the dissolut

1. ሰ/መ/ቁ 235233: ጥቅምት 26 ቀን 2016ዓ.ም Theme of disputes The central theme of the dispute concerns whether the Appellate Court committed a fundamental error of law by acquitting the respondent, who had been convicted by the High Court, regarding criminal charges stemming from his alleged participation in collective crimes of organized and incited movement, riots, and attempted aggravated homicide. The charges relate to acts of violence, property destruction, and displacement tha

Cassation Decision Number 224265 (Date: Hidar 30, 2015 E.C.) Theme of disputes The dispute primarily concerns the statute of limitations for inheritance claims and the procedural requirements for presenting evidence to counter a preliminary objection regarding time-barred claims. Undisputed facts The applicant, claiming to be the sole heir of his deceased parents, sought the partition of inheritance—including farmland, a house, and trees—currently held by the respondents (his

Dhaddacha Ijibbaataa Murtii Waliigalaa Federaalaa Lakk.Galmee 208865 ta'e dhaddacha guyyaa 28/6/2014 ooleen "namni qabiyyee Lafaa iddoo Mana jireenya Waldaatiif kennamu argachuuf qophaa'ee osoo jiru hojiif iddoo biraa yoo jijjiirame,iddoo Lafa Mana jireenyaa hin argatu jechuun kan hin danda'amne ta'uu" hiikoo kennee ture. DHaddachi Ijjibbaataa Mana Murtii Waliigalaa Federaalaa Lakk.Galmee 232474 ta'e DHaddacha Caamsaa 29,bara 2015 ooleen "mirga abbaa qabeenyummaa gar-malee fa

DHIMMWF 219931 Dhaddacha Ebila 28, 2014 oole irratti ''Hadaraa Maallaqa Doolaraa Nama bira waliigaltee Afaaniin kaayame'' deebisanii gaafachuu ilaalchise murtii dirqisiisaa kanneera. ======================= Dubbiin akkana! Deebi kennaan himanna bu'ura waliigaltee imaanaa afaaniin iyyataa ammaa waliin gaafa 22/12/2012 taasiseen maallaqa doollara Ameerikaa 225,000 kan bira kaayee ture fi kana keessa Doolara 126,000 akkaataa waliigalteen waan naaf deebisuu dhabeef akka naaf

Bail is a Principle. The right of an accused person to be released on bail is a fundamental constitutional right (Art. 19(6)) rooted in the presumption of innocence (Art. 20(3)). Restrictions on this right must be interpreted narrowly and applied cautiously. ================== CPC Art. 67(a) permits bail denial if the court believes the accused will likely not fulfill their obligations. However, the court must arrive at this conclusion based on sufficient reasons and evidence

DHIMMWF Lakk Galmee: 153231 tahe irratti dhaddacha gaafa 25/01/2011 ooleen dhimma murtii xumura argate ta'ee haala addaan dhimma murtii dhumaa argate kan hin jechiisiifne ta'uu ilaalchisee murtii dirqisiisa ajaa'aba kannera. ======================== Kunis kafaltii qabeenya dhaalaa eega gaggeeffame booda kafaltii qabeenya dhaalmaa keessatti hammatamu /galuu qabu boodarra kan argame yoo tahe kafaltii qabeenya dhaalmaa jedhamee haaratti gaafachuun akka danda'amuu fi kana haara

Cassation Decision Number:213020 ሚያዚያ 25 ቀን 2014 ዓ.ም Theme of Disputes:The underlying case began as a spousal property dispute (ባልና ሚስት ንብረት ክርክር) initiated in the Federal First Instance Court. The respondent (original plaintiff) sought the division of a jointly acquired house (Mahiber Bet) and the determination of child maintenance (ልጅ ቀለብ). However, the dispute that reached the Cassation bench focused primarily on **procedural law and the fundamental constitutional right to

Dhaddachi Ijibbaataa MMWF lakk galmee 250900 dhaddacha gaafa 5/2/2017 ooleen Ragaa Ogeessaa fi Ragaa Namaa idilee kallattii ilaalchisee murtii dirqisiisaa kenneera. =================== Ragoonni namaa yeroo balaan tiraafikaa mudatu iddoo balichi itti mudate jiraniifi ragaa kallattii ta’an otoo jiranii, ragaan ogeessa tiraafikaa pilaanii kan kaase balicha booda, balaan booda guyyoota 3 ka'eyoo ta’e, ragaa kallattii waan hin taanef ragoonni namaa iddoo balichaa jiran, ragaa

The Applicant who is a legal professional and visually impaired sustained car accident causing 20% permanent injury. He filed suit against respondents claiming outstanding damage compensation, totaling Birr 654,403.18. Applicant also signed a settlement with the 2nd respondent (insurance) after an accident. The lower courts sided defendants reasoning that Applicant as a "legal professional who understands the content of the contract well," he was fully aware of his actions

Cassation Number 175660, 25/3/2016 Federal Supreme Court Cassation Bench renders a fascinating binding decision on the issue: whether money deposited into another person's bank account, allegedly by mistake, should be returned to the payer. ================= If you knowingly pay a debt you don't owe, the money isn't yours anymore. Most people would assume that if you pay someone money you don't legally owe them, you have a right to get it back. This intuitive idea is support

DHIMMWF Lakk galmee 119851 tahe irratti murtii dirqisiisaa Abbootiin seeraa 7 irratti muudaman gaafa 26/07/2011 kanneen dhimma yeroo kam MSD irrratti jala murtii kannamee irraa oliyyannoon ykn iyyannoon ijibbaataa yeroo kam dhiyaachuu akka qabuun walqabatee murtiiwwan dirqisiisaa duraan kannaman kan jijjireedha. ==================== Kunis murtii mormii sadarkaa duraa irratti M/Murtii Ol’iyyannoo dhagahuun kennamu irraa gareen komii qabu eega dhimmichi qajeelfamaan M/

Imagine a criminal trial nearing its end. Evidence has been presented, arguments made, and the judge is about to render a verdict. Then, a "smoking gun"—evidence so crucial it reframes the entire case, suddenly surfaces. A fascinating case from Federal Cassation Bench provides a powerful answer, establishing a clear hierarchy of judicial principles: procedural integrity aimed at discovering the truth is a precondition for justice, while speed is a characteristic of its proper

Part two...The Waiting Game No One Wants to Play!! ==================== Imagine a justice system creating its own internal paralysis. A citizen’s cases were put on hold indefinitely, not due to its merits, but because of a separate legal debate happening elsewhere. This frustrating scenario became a reality when lower courts, following an internal directive, stop active all cases of a certain type to await a future decision. ==================== The lower courts justified pau