0c089? importer of products, which included exporting artwork to Europe and importing vitenge (cotton fabrics) to the DRC. However, the Applicant does not support the claim with evidence or prove the existence of the said business, such as a business licence, payment receipts or business contracts. This prayer is consequently d ismissed. 126. As to the time lost in proceedings before the High Court, this Court notes that time lost may be proved by adducing evidence as to the financial income that would have been made.27 ln the instant case, loss caused by lengthy court proceedings could also have been evidenced by the payment of legal fees, costs in proceedings and other related costs.z8 The Applicant does not provide any such evidence to support his claims. The prayer is therefore dismissed. 127.The Applicant also prays this Court to award him Tanzania Shillings Twenty Million (TZS 20,000,000) being the value of the artefacts that were allegedty sold to a certain Mussa Ruganda Leki as mentioned in the proceedings of Civil Case No. 263 of 2005 referred earlier in this judgment. Regarding this prayer, the Court notes that the Appliant did not link his claim with any of the human rights violations found in this judgment. Furthermore, the claim is not in relation to an alleged violation of his right to property protected under Article 14 of the Charter. Finally, the Applicant did not establish the Respondent State's responsibility for the loss of the value of those items as a result of the private dispute setled in Civil Case No. 263 of 2005. The prayer is consequenfly dismissed. 128. With respect to the claim for payment of Tanzania Shillings Fourty Five Million (Tzs 45,000,000) as compensation for the confiscation of his personal belongings by agents of the Respondent State, the Court notes that the issue was not raised as an alleged violation in the Application. Furthermore, the Applicant did not substantiate his claim. This prayer is equally dismissed. 129. Regarding the Applicant's prayer for compensation due to the disruption of his life plan, as well as chronic illness and poor health that he suffered, the Court 27 28 See Lohd lssa Konat9 v. Burkina /dem, g 46 rations), S$ 3843 3t