60. In any event, the Court notes that, in this case, the grounds for termination of the contract are explicitly mentioned in the termination letter which the Applicant does not deny having been aware of.?° Moreover, the Applicant does not dispute the fact that the domestic courts found a violation and awarded him damages for the fact that he was not heard prior to the decision to dismiss him. 61. In view of the foregoing, the Court finds that there has been no violation of the right to defence and holds in conclusion that the Respondent State did not violate Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter. ii. Right to a reasoned Judgment 62. The Applicant submits that, for having failed to invoke contrary reasons to counter those he invoked in regard to his professional status, the Supreme Court violated his right to a reasoned decision. eK 63. The Court notes that Article 7 of the Charter which guarantees the right to a fair trial does not expressly provide for the right to a reasoned notes, however, that the African Commission's Judgment. The Court Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial provide for "an entitlement to a determination of their rights and obligations without undue delay and with adequate notice of and reasons for the decisions" as a component of the right to a fair hearing.2"The motivation of judicial decisions, stemming from the principle of proper administration of justice, therefore makes it incumbent on the judge to clearly base his reasoning on objective arguments. 64. The Court notes, on this point, that in application of the above Guidelines, the Commission considered in Kenneth Good v. Botswana that the right to a reasoned decision derives from the right to seize a competent national court as provided 20See the statement of facts by the Applicant in this Application §§ 20-21. 21 African Commission ‘Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa (2001), Principles A(2)(i). (Emphasis by the Court). 16