|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 1983 |
|
|
Whether an extra‑judicial confession and voice identification can corroborate guilt and whether one accused’s confession may convict a co‑accused.
Criminal law – extra‑judicial confession – admissibility and corroboration; voice identification as corroboration; Evidence Act s.33 – limits on using one accused’s confession against co‑accused; doctrine of recent possession and distinction between thief and receiver; requirement for interpreter’s evidence when translating statements.
|
12 December 1983 |
|
Co‑accused confession admissible for confessor but cannot alone convict another; recent possession alone insufficient to prove murder.
* Criminal law – extra-judicial confession – admissibility when retracted – corroboration by voice identification.
* Evidence – confession by co-accused – not sole basis to convict another (s.33 Evidence Act) but may serve as corroboration if independent linking evidence exists.
* Evidence – recent possession of stolen property – may indicate receiving, not necessarily participation in theft or murder.
* Procedure – interpreter’s evidence – interpreter should ordinarily testify to avoid hearsay; recorder knowing the language may suffice for admissibility.
|
12 December 1983 |
|
Appellate court upheld murder conviction on reliable eyewitness identification, branded cattle ownership and corroborated exhibit linking appellant to victim.
Criminal law – Circumstantial evidence – Identification of accused – eyewitness opportunity and credibility; property identification by branding; admissibility and corroboration of extrajudicial identification of exhibit; cumulative circumstances proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
|
12 December 1983 |
|
Reliable night-time identification and corroborative possession of distinctive sword upheld circumstantial murder conviction.
* Criminal law – Murder – Circumstantial evidence – Identification of accused by eyewitness at night – Identification of property (branded cattle and distinctive sword) – Admissibility and corroborative value of deceased’s prior statement under s.34(B) 2(a) Evidence Act.
|
12 December 1983 |
|
Intoxication and duress defences failed: insufficient evidence and post-offence conduct showed willing participation.
Criminal law – Murder – Defences of involuntary intoxication and compulsion (section 17 Penal Code) – evidential requirements; post-offence conduct as indicia of voluntariness; bare assertions insufficient.
|
12 December 1983 |
|
Intoxication and duress defences failed where conduct and evidence showed deliberate killing and concealment; appeals dismissed.
* Criminal law – Murder – Defences of intoxication and compulsion (duress) – evidential requirements for intoxication; immediate threat requirement under section 17 Penal Code. * Evidence – Post-offence conduct and consistency with alleged incapacity or compulsion – relevance to credibility.
|
12 December 1983 |
|
Circumstantial evidence linking appellant to getaway vehicle upheld; factual inference of participation sustained and appeal dismissed.
* Criminal law – robbery – conviction based on circumstantial evidence – identification of getaway vehicle (registration SU 6484) and driver’s control of vehicle as basis for inference of guilt.
* Evidence – circumstantial evidence and inferences – when an inference from primary facts is reasonable and irresistible appellate interference inappropriate.
* Credibility – rejection of alibi where supporting witness denies account and timings conflict with established facts.
* Appellate procedure – limits on second appeals challenging factual inferences.
|
6 December 1983 |
Civil Practice and Procedure - Plaint - Failure to disclose a cause of action - Whether necessary for plaintiff to aver compliance with s. 6 of the Sale of Goods Ordinance Cap. 214(T). Civil Practice and Procedure - Plaint - Particulars in - Special defence open to defendant - Whether plaintiff required to anticipate it - S.6 Sale of Goods Ordinance and O. VII r. 1(e) Civil Procedure Code. Civil Practice and Procedure - Reply to written statement of defense - Whether court to take into account when considering whether plaint discloses cause of action - O.VIr.7Civil Procedure Code. Civil Practice and Procedure - Plaint - Failure to disclose a cause of action - Dismissal of suit - Proper action to be taken - O. VII r. 11 (a) Civil Procedure Code. |
1 December 1983 |
|
Section 6 creates a special statutory defence; plaintiff need not plead compliance in the plaint; issue is for trial.
Sale of Goods Ordinance s.6 – statutory requirements (acceptance, part payment, written memorandum) are a special defence, not part of cause of action; pleading practice – plaintiff need not aver compliance in the plaint; defendant must plead the s.6 defence and it is a triable issue; Civil Procedure – plaint that discloses no cause of action should be rejected under Order 7 r.11(a), not dismissed.
|
1 December 1983 |
|
Section 6 of the Sale of Goods Ordinance creates a statutory defence, not a cause of action that must be pleaded by the plaintiff.
* Sale of Goods Ordinance (s.6) – statutory requirements are procedural; they create a special defence, not elements of cause of action; issue to be proved if raised by defendant. * Pleading – Order 7 r.1(e) – plaintiff need only plead facts constituting cause of action; not obliged to plead compliance with statutory defences. * Civil procedure – preliminary objection on section 6 should not be decided without evidence; correct remedy for a plaint disclosing no cause of action is rejection, not dismissal.
|
1 December 1983 |
| November 1983 |
|
|
Reported
Domestic services can constitute 'joint efforts' under s.114, but on these facts the wife was entitled only to the customary Shs.3,000.
Family law – matrimonial assets – section 114(1) Law of Marriage Act – meaning of 'matrimonial assets' and 'joint efforts' – domestic services held to be capable of constituting contributions; application of mischief rule and statutory purpose; factual limitation where domestic contribution minimal or offset by prior provision.
|
29 November 1983 |
|
The applicant’s domestic services can qualify as contributions to matrimonial assets under section 114, but entitlement depends on the facts.
Family law – Definition of matrimonial/family assets; section 114 Law of Marriage Act 1971 – 'contributions in money, property or work' includes domestic services; construction by mischief rule and statutory purpose; application to division of matrimonial home; relevance of prior advances and customary parting gifts.
|
29 November 1983 |
|
Appeal allowed: single inconsistent eyewitness identification rendered murder conviction unsafe, conviction quashed and appellant released.
* Criminal law – identification evidence – reliance on single eyewitness – dangers where witness delayed naming assailant and gives inconsistent account.
* Criminal law – sufficiency of evidence – inconsistencies between witness account and physical evidence may render conviction unsafe.
* Criminal procedure – appeal – conviction quashed where prosecution case depends on unreliable testimony.
|
29 November 1983 |
|
Reported
Domestic services qualify as "joint efforts" under section 114, but entitlement depends on the extent of contribution and factual circumstances.
Family/matrimonial assets – Construction of "their joint efforts" under s.114 Law of Marriage Act – Domestic services (housekeeping/child‑rearing) count as contributions – Effect of prior financial advances and customary parting gifts – Interaction of s.114 and s.115.
|
29 November 1983 |
Family Law - Matrimonial Property - Whether domestic services of a housewife amount to a contribution in the acquisition of matrimonial assets. Family Law- Matrimonial assets- Family assets - Assets envisaged u/s 114 (1) of the Law of Marriage Act, J971 - Matrimonial assets acquired by spouses during marriage by their joint efforts. |
29 November 1983 |
|
Domestic services by a wife count as contributions towards matrimonial assets.
Family Law – matrimonial assets – division of assets – domestic duties as contributions to asset acquisition.
|
29 November 1983 |
|
Applicants' murder convictions quashed for unreliable eyewitness evidence, weak circumstantial links and failure to consider alibis.
Criminal law – murder – reliability of eyewitness identification; delay in reporting; circumstantial evidence – missing ammunition and tools; alibi defences – requirement to assess whether alibi raises reasonable doubt; appellate intervention where convictions unsafe.
|
29 November 1983 |
|
Conviction unsafe where identification was unreliable, ballistic and tool‑evidence unlinked, and alibi defences were not properly considered.
* Criminal law – Identification evidence – delayed reporting and inconsistencies undermine reliability; caution required before basing conviction on such evidence.
* Criminal law – Ballistic evidence – absence of recovered shell or linkage to issued ammunition renders missing‑rounds theory weak.
* Criminal law – Circumstantial evidence – common, unmarked tools cannot establish ownership or guilt.
* Criminal procedure – Defence of alibi – trial judge must assess whether alibi creates reasonable doubt; failure to do so may render conviction unsafe.
* Appeal – Sufficiency of evidence – convictions quashed where prosecution case lacks cogency and trial judge misdirected on defences.
|
29 November 1983 |
Civil Practice and Procedure - Appeal originating from Primary Court - Whether decision of the High Court in matters originating from the Primary Court appealable -Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1979. Civil Practice and Procedure - Appeal originating from Primary Court - Certification of point of law - Whether Court of Appeal has jurisdiction - Rule 46 (3) Court of Appeal Rules. |
28 November 1983 |
Civil Practice and Procedure - Revision - Notice of Motion to revise or nullify an order of stay of execution - Whether Court of Appeal has jurisdiction -s.3(l) and 3 (2)Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1979, s.38 Civil Procedure Code Act. 49 of 1966 rr.2 and 36 Court of Appeal Rules, O.XLll, R.l Civil Procedure Code. Civil Practice and Procedure - Powers of the Court of Appeal - Appellate Jurisdiction Act - Whether Court of Appeal has powers of High Court Civil Practice and Procedure - Appeal to Court of Appeal - Definition of- R.2 Court of Appeal Rules |
9 November 1983 |
Civil Practice and Procedure - Appeal - Failure to file appeal within prescribed time - Appellant represented by Advocate - Whether appeal to be admitted - R.83 Court of Appeal Rules. Civil Practice and Procedure - Appeal - Appeal of time - Advocates failure to check the law properly - Whether sufficient ground. |
3 November 1983 |
|
Absence of the required decree in the record rendered the appeal incompetent and it was struck out, motion dismissed with costs.
Court of Appeal procedure – competence of appeal – record of appeal must include decree under Rule 89(2) – failure to include decree renders appeal incompetent; Preliminary objections – notice requirement under Rule 100 – adjournment to enable response; Application for extension – cannot cure substantive defect in competence; Appeal struck out; costs awarded.
|
2 November 1983 |
Civil Practice and Procedure - Appeal, Record of- Not containing a copy of the decree - Whether appeal competent - R. 89 (2) Court of Appeal Rules. Civil Practice and Procedure - Appeal - Record not containing decree - Notice of Motion seeking extension of time to file a supplementary record - Whether notice an answer to objection regarding competency of appeal. |
2 November 1983 |
| October 1983 |
|
|
|
20 October 1983 |
Evidence - Experts - Evidence of expert photographer with occasional experience in examining engines and chassis of suspected numbers - Unsafe to base conviction on uncorroborated testimony of such expert. Evidence - Credibility - Trial court’s finding as to credibility of witness usually binding on appeal court. Evidence - Experts - Requirements. |
20 October 1983 |
|
Primary Court had jurisdiction and appellant proved a partnership interest, entitling her to 50% of the house.
Procedure/Jurisdiction – Primary Court jurisdiction where land not registered under Land Ordinance; Civil evidence – concurrence of findings by trial and appellate courts on factual issues; Property/Partnership – proof of joint building contributions establishes entitlement to share in house; Succession – distinction between partnership/ownership dispute and administration of deceased’s estate.
|
20 October 1983 |
Civil Practice and Procedure - Jurisdiction of Primary Courts in cases involving title or interest to land registered under the Land Registration Ordinance, Cap. 334- Section 14 of the Magistrates ’ Courts Act, Cap. 537. Land Law - Compensation in respect of contribution made to property. |
20 October 1983 |
|
Appellate court quashed conviction where key prosecution witnesses were unreliable and expert identification evidence was speculative.
* Criminal law – appeal against conviction – appellate reappraisal of credibility – limits on substituting appellate view for trial court findings.
* Evidence – expert identification of chassis/engine numbers – requirement of demonstrable expertise and reliable methodology.
* Evidence – adverse credibility – witness who admits being told by police to lie is inherently unreliable.
* Remedy – quashing conviction where conviction rests on unreliable or speculative evidence.
|
20 October 1983 |
|
Appeal allowed: conviction unsafe due to unreliable eyewitnesses and unresolved evidence of possible poisoning.
Criminal law – Murder conviction – Safety of conviction – Reliability and consistency of eyewitness testimony – Evidence suggesting poisoning as alternate cause of death – Incomplete trial record regarding recalled medical evidence – Unsafe conviction quashed.
|
20 October 1983 |
| September 1983 |
|
|
Confession admissibility depends on when made; exclusion left insufficient evidence against second appellant, but corroborated evidence upheld first appellant's conviction.
Criminal law – admissibility of confessions – timing of confession determines admissibility; statute not retrospective. Corroboration of non-police confession by forensic blood evidence and circumstantial links can sustain conviction. Insufficient circumstantial evidence and indeterminate forensic results render conviction unsafe.
|
5 September 1983 |
|
Pre‑amendment police confession inadmissible; first appellant’s guilt corroborated and upheld, second appellant’s conviction quashed.
Evidence — Confessions to police — admissibility determined by date made; amendment to s.27 Evidence Act not retrospective; caution statement made pre‑amendment inadmissible; Corroboration — blood‑stained clothing and chemist’s report; post‑mortem consistency with accused’s statements; sufficiency of evidence — suspicion vs proof beyond reasonable doubt; Criminal appeal — conviction unsafe where key confession excluded.
|
5 September 1983 |
|
Reported
Evidence — Confession — Confession to police officer — Admissibility in evidence — Effect of the 1980 amendment to S.27 of the Law of Evidence Act. 1967.
Criminal law — Malice-aforethought — Brutal nature of the killing -— Whether malice - aforethought proved.. |
5 September 1983 |
|
Fatal blow’s timing and lack of proved malice precluded murder convictions; one appellant acquitted, four convicted of manslaughter.
Criminal law – Causation and timing of fatal injury – Uncertainty whether fatal blow inflicted during initial assault or later; Common intention and malice aforethought – requirement for murder conviction; Liability of non‑participating joiner – benefit of reasonable doubt; Substitution of conviction – murder to manslaughter where malice not proved; Sentence reduction from death to term imprisonment.
|
5 September 1983 |
| August 1983 |
|
|
Taxing officer reduced an excessive appellate instruction fee and taxed the bill at Shs.177,735.
Costs — Taxation of advocates' bill — Whether instruction fee for appeal excessive — Effect of prior High Court research on appeal costs — Admissibility of receipts for copies of proceedings.
|
4 August 1983 |
|
The appellant’s murder conviction was quashed and substituted with manslaughter, with an eight-year sentence.
Criminal law – murder v. manslaughter – intention to kill; assessors’ unanimous finding; duty to consider individual responsibility versus common purpose; substitution of conviction and sentence on appeal.
|
1 August 1983 |
|
Murder conviction substituted for manslaughter where evidence failed to prove common intention or intent to kill.
Criminal law – murder vs manslaughter – requirement of intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm; common intention – assessment of evidence and reliance on assessors' opinions.
|
1 August 1983 |
|
Appellate court substituted manslaughter for murder where evidence showed unlawful beating causing death but no intent to kill.
Criminal law – Murder versus manslaughter; intention to kill and intention to cause grievous harm; common intention doctrine; appellate substitution of conviction and sentence.
|
1 August 1983 |
| July 1983 |
|
|
Conviction for murder quashed where evidence failed to prove common intention to kill; substituted with manslaughter and eight years' imprisonment.
* Criminal law – Distinction between murder and manslaughter – intention to kill versus intention to cause grievous harm.
* Criminal law – Common intention – requirement of evidence to establish concerted purpose.
* Criminal procedure – Role of assessors’ opinions in trials – significance of majority view when assessing intention.
* Appeal – Substitution of conviction and sentence where trial judge’s conclusion unsupported by evidence.
|
29 July 1983 |
|
Court upheld conviction for theft by a public servant based on prisoner witnesses corroborated by recovered fitted parts.
Criminal law – Theft by public servant – Credibility of prisoner-witnesses – Corroboration by recovery/fitting of stolen parts – Identification parade evidence – Appeal dismissed.
|
29 July 1983 |
|
Appellate court affirmed murder conviction, finding eyewitness evidence proved stabbing causing death.
Criminal law – Murder – sufficiency of evidence – eyewitness testimony – appellate review of trial court's factual findings and credibility assessments.
|
25 July 1983 |
|
Appellate court dismisses appeal, finding eyewitness evidence proved the appellant stabbed and killed the deceased.
Criminal law – Murder – Sufficiency of evidence – Eyewitness testimony – Appeal against conviction – Appellate review of trial court findings.
|
25 July 1983 |
|
Second appeal dismissed where no legal point was raised challenging convictions for obtaining money by false pretences.
Criminal appeal — second appeal — convictions for obtaining money by false pretences and attempt — no legal point raised on appeal — appeal deemed incompetent and dismissed.
|
25 July 1983 |
|
Failure to comply with appeal procedural rules and to serve the application rendered the Notice of Appeal deemed withdrawn under Rule 84(a).
* Civil procedure – Appeal – Notice of Appeal filed after High Court judgment – procedural compliance required for obtaining and serving copy of proceedings – failure to copy application to other party – Rule 84(a) Court of Appeal Rules 1979 – notice of appeal deemed withdrawn.
|
25 July 1983 |
|
|
5 July 1983 |
|
Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction where High Court made no decision; another High Court judge may set aside an ex‑parte judgment.
Civil procedure – Appeal jurisdiction – No appeal lies where High Court made no decision on the matter; purported leave to appeal in absence of a decision is a nullity – Order 9 r.13(1) Civil Procedure Code – "Court" means the court as constituted; any judge of the High Court may hear application to set aside an ex‑parte decree.
|
5 July 1983 |
|
An applicant must show credible, sufficient cause for delay to set aside an ex‑parte judgment; bare assertions fail.
Civil procedure – Setting aside ex‑parte judgment – Requirement to show sufficient cause for delay (Order 9 r.13 CPC); Credibility of explanations for non‑appearance; Time‑barred applications and necessity of seeking leave to extend time; Distinguishing bona fide misapprehension precedents.
|
5 July 1983 |
|
Applicant failed to show sufficient cause to set aside an ex parte judgment; appeal dismissed with costs.
* Civil Procedure – setting aside ex parte judgment – requirement to show sufficient cause/prevention under Order 9/Rule 13.
* Evidence – credibility of explanations for non-appearance – alleged out-of-court settlement by relative insufficient without verification.
* Procedural duty – applicant should make inquiries from respondent/advocate when alleging settlement.
* Time bar – delay in applying to set aside an ex parte judgment may justify dismissal.
|
5 July 1983 |
| June 1983 |
|
|
A second appeal was held incompetent where lower courts’ theft convictions were supported by ample, credible evidence.
* Criminal law – Theft – Conviction upheld where trial and first appellate courts’ findings were supported by ample and credible evidence.
* Appellate procedure – Second appeal – Competence of appeal where lower courts’ factual findings are well-supported.
|
25 June 1983 |
|
|
16 June 1983 |
|
Reported
Criminal Practice and Procedure — assessors — Failure of trial judge to direct assessors on provocation — Whether irregularity fatal to the proceedings.
Criminal Practice and Procedure - Dissent of Appeal Court to ask retrial. |
2 June 1983 |