Public Health Act, 2009

Chapter 99

There are outstanding amendments that have not yet been applied. See the History tab for more information.
Public Health Act, 2009

Loading PDF...

This document is 4.9 MB. Do you want to load it?

Error loading PDF
Try reloading the page or downloading the PDF.
Error:
▲ To the top

History of this document

31 December 2023
Chapter 99

Revised Laws 2023

Consolidation
04 December 2009 amendment not yet applied
01 July 2009
20 March 2009 this version
12 March 2009
Assented to

Cited documents 0

Documents citing this one 9

Judgment
7
Private clan exhumation not governed strictly by Graves Act; applicants failed to prove procedural or health-related defects.
* Graves (Removal) Act – scope – primarily regulates exhumations for public interest under Ministerial authority; limited application to private clan removals. * Procedure – non-compliance with Graves Act/Regulations does not automatically vitiate private exhumation proceedings; court may act under Section 95 CPC and customary practice. * Consultation – consent/opinion of interested relatives is important but not every clan member must be personally consulted; burden to prove non-consultation rests on the applicant. * Public health – allegations of health risk require evidential support, not mere speculation.
Crop-destruction tort not time-barred; defendants' preliminary objections dismissed and amendment of plaint allowed.
Civil procedure – Preliminary objections – point of law must be apparent on face of record; Limitation – tortious damage to crops attracts three-year limitation (Item 6) not one-year for acts done "in pursuance of written law"; Pleadings – Order VII r.7 requires specific reliefs but minor pleading defects curable under Order VI r.17; 90‑day demand notices and variation in claimed amounts raise issues of proof, not pure law.
Conviction quashed where search was unlawful and prosecution failed to prove link between appellant and vehicle containing trophies.
* Criminal procedure — Search and seizure — Compliance with sections 38 and 40 CPA (authority, time of execution, receipt/signature/reporting) — Evidence seized during unlawful search may render conviction unsafe. * Evidence — Proof of possession — Connection between accused and place of concealment (motor vehicle) — ignition key alone insufficient without corroboration. * Admissibility — Proper marking/receipt of exhibits — trial rulings may cure objections where record shows formal admission.
Convictions for housebreaking and theft quashed for defective charge, insufficient evidence and tenancy/possession issues.
Criminal law — Housebreaking and theft — insufficiency of proof of stolen property and time of offence; defective charge for not naming complainant (Primary Court Criminal Procedure Code s.21(2)); expiry of tenancy and lawful repossession; appellate re-evaluation of evidence.
A Juvenile Court lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate maintenance claims against administrators of a deceased's estate; probate court is the proper forum.
Jurisdiction — Juvenile Court v. Probate Court — maintenance claims against administrators of deceased estate; administrators’ fiduciary duty; jurisdiction conferred by law, not party admission.
Trial court’s failure to decide framed issues and reliance on unproved notice vitiated judgment; appeal allowed and damages awarded.
Civil procedure – judgment requirements – Order XX Rules 4 & 5 CPC – failure to decide framed issues; Pleadings – court not to decide on grounds outside pleadings – malicious prosecution and cause of action raised suo motu; Evidence – obligation to tender material documentary evidence (notice) – failure to prove lawfulness of confiscation; Remedies – appellate intervention and award of damages, interest and costs.
Court orders exhumation and reburial where in‑residence grave near a water well posed public health risk and local consent existed.
Graves (Removal) Act – primarily for ministerial/public interest removals; Civil Procedure Code s.95 – private applications for exhumation; Public Health Act (ss.126–129) – burials at designated sites and prohibition of unlicensed funeral homes; public health risk from graves near communal water sources; local government and family consent as material consideration.