|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 1985 |
|
|
First appellant’s murder conviction quashed; second appellant’s conviction reduced to manslaughter for insufficient proof of malice.
* Criminal law – Murder v. manslaughter – proof of malice aforethought required for murder; * Common intention – liability of co-participant in mob action; * Evidence – value of dying declaration and admissions in linking accused to fatal act; * Mob violence and attribution of responsibility among multiple participants.
|
22 December 1985 |
|
Court affirms murder conviction where expert evidence linked violent rape to ruptured bladder and fatal peritonitis.
* Criminal law – identity – sufficiency of eye-witness identification in bright moonlight; dying statement evidence.
* Medico-legal evidence – post-mortem findings (ruptured bladder, chemical peritonitis) and causal link to sexual assault.
* Evidence procedure – improper reception of autopsy report by police; Court's power under Rule 34 to call an expert witness.
* Homicide – where violent sexual assault causes fatal injuries, malice aforethought may be inferred and supports murder conviction.
|
3 December 1985 |
|
Circumstantial evidence and suspicion were insufficient to prove the appellant set the fatal fire beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – circumstantial evidence – proof beyond reasonable doubt – suspicion insufficient; time lapse between alleged conduct and offence may allow alternative perpetrators; motive must be compelling to support inference of guilt.
|
3 December 1985 |
|
A husband who divorces his wife for refusing religious conversion is not entitled to refund of bridewealth.
* Family law – bridewealth restitution – entitlement where husband divorces wife for refusing religious conversion – husband not entitled to refund. * Evidence – relevance and burden of producing a formal divorce decree in bridewealth claims. * Factors – duration of marriage and presence of children relevant against restitution of bridewealth.
|
3 December 1985 |
|
An admission to a supervisor, supported by corroborative evidence, upheld a theft conviction; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – stealing by public servant; admission to supervisory officer; corroboration of admissions; sufficiency of evidence; appellate competence where no point of law raised.
|
3 December 1985 |
|
A conviction may stand on an uncorroborated accomplice's credible testimony; late denials may be disregarded.
Criminal law – robbery with violence; Accomplice evidence – competency and corroboration; Evidence Act section 142 – conviction may rest on uncorroborated accomplice testimony; Credibility assessment; Afterthought denials and failure to cross-examine; Appeal dismissed.
|
2 December 1985 |
|
Identification is a factual issue; a second appeal is incompetent where no point of law arises.
* Criminal law – Identification evidence – Whether identification was properly established by witnesses who knew accused – Identification is a question of fact. * Appeal procedure – Second appeal – Scope limited where no question of law arises – Appeal incompetent if only factual issues are raised.
|
2 December 1985 |
|
An appeal on identification alone is incompetent where both lower courts have accepted the identification as a factual finding.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – identification is a question of fact; Appellate procedure – second appeal – where both trial and first appellate courts accept factual findings (identification), no point of law arises for determination by the Court of Appeal.
|
2 December 1985 |
| November 1985 |
|
|
A Notice of Appeal filed late without a granted extension of time is incompetent and must be struck off the register.
* Criminal procedure – appeal – extension of time to appeal – refusal by High Court renders subsequent late Notice of Appeal in Court of Appeal incompetent; * Procedure – striking off Notice of Appeal – Rule 3(2)(a) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
|
26 November 1985 |
|
Appellate court upheld robbery conviction, finding eyewitness identification credible and appeal without merit.
* Criminal law – robbery with violence – identification evidence – credibility and sufficiency of eyewitness identification – appellate review of factual findings.
|
26 November 1985 |
|
An uncorroborated dying declaration made under poor identification conditions cannot safely sustain a murder conviction.
* Criminal law – Dying declaration – Reliability and corroboration required where identification circumstances are poor; night-time/misidentification and intoxication may render a dying declaration unsafe.
|
22 November 1985 |
|
Appellate court reduced a manifestly excessive 10-year sentence to 6 years because mitigating factors were overlooked.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Manifestly excessive sentence – Appellate interference where trial judge failed to consider mitigating factors including youth, guilty plea, lack of previous convictions and lengthy pre-trial custody.
|
22 November 1985 |
|
Omission in charge and PF3 irregularity were curable under section 346; conviction reduced to actual bodily harm.
Criminal law – defective charge (omission of "unlawfully") – curable under s.346 Criminal Procedure Code; PF3/medical report – s.213(3) failure to inform accused – curable where other evidence exists; identification evidence – question of fact and acceptable; injuries – grievous harm (s.225) versus actual bodily harm (s.241).
|
22 November 1985 |
|
Omission of "unlawfully" and a PF.3 procedural lapse were curable; conviction reduced to actual bodily harm and appeal dismissed.
Criminal procedure — defective charge: omission of "unlawfully" under s.225 — curability under s.346 CPC; Criminal procedure — PF.3 medical report — s.213(3) right to summon author — irregularity curable/immaterial; Evidence — identification sufficiency; Substantive offence — grievous harm (s.225) v actual bodily harm (s.241) — substitution of conviction.
|
22 November 1985 |
|
Appellate court affirms murder conviction, finding eyewitness evidence credible and the appellant’s alternative account implausible.
* Criminal law – Murder – Conviction based on eyewitness identification and circumstantial facts – Trial judge’s credibility findings and appellate review.
* Evidence – Afterthought defence – Failure to put alternative version to prosecution witnesses undermines credibility.
* Evidence – Accused’s silence or claimed numbness when confronted – credibility and relevance to guilt.
|
21 November 1985 |
|
A s168 "guilty but insane" finding requires evidence of commission and cannot replace a proper trial.
Criminal procedure – Section 168 Criminal Procedure Code – Special finding that accused "did the act charged but by reason of insanity is not guilty" – Requires evidence that accused committed the act; such finding is in substance a conviction and cannot be made without trial or evidence on commission of the offence.
|
20 November 1985 |
|
A special finding of 'guilty but insane' requires evidence of the charged act and cannot replace a trial.
Criminal Procedure Code s.168 – special finding that accused 'did the act but was insane' – requires evidence of commission of the charged act – such finding is in substance a conviction – invalid when made without trial or evidentiary hearing; psychiatric reports alone insufficient.
|
20 November 1985 |
|
Appellate court upheld a six-year manslaughter sentence, finding it not manifestly excessive.
Criminal law – Manslaughter – Sentencing discretion – Whether six-year term was manifestly excessive – Aggravating factor: use of a knife while victim unarmed – Mitigating factors: provocation, no previous convictions, lengthy pre-trial custody – Appellate restraint in interfering with trial judge’s sentencing discretion.
|
20 November 1985 |
|
A court may not find an accused "did the act but was insane" absent evidence proving commission of the offence.
Criminal law — Insanity findings — Special finding that accused "did the act but was insane" requires evidence of commission; such a finding is in substance a conviction and cannot be made without a trial.
|
20 November 1985 |
|
Appeal against murder convictions dismissed: identification, intent and common intention properly established despite alcohol consumption.
Criminal law – Murder – identification by eyewitnesses; intoxication and capacity to form intent; common intention to commit fatal assault and dispose of body; post‑mortem evidence of blunt‑force trauma; rejection of alibi.
|
19 November 1985 |
|
Reported
Criminal Practice and Procedure - Charges - Essential element of offence left out- Defective - When defect may vitiate proceedings.
Evidence - Corroboration - Failure of magistrate to warn himself of the danger to convict without corroborative evidence - When fatal to proceedings. |
15 November 1985 |
| October 1985 |
|
|
Reported
Rent Restriction Act - Landlord and Tenant - National Housing Corporation exempted from the provisions of sections 19 and 20 of the Rent Restriction Act - Such exemption attaches to premises.
Landlord and Tenant - Tenant sublets to its employee - Tenant seeks to repossess premises on employee resigning from employment -
Landlord offers tenancy to the subtenant - Whether such offer terminates tenancy between the landlord and the tenant- Rent Restriction Act, ss. 19 and 20 - G.N. 86 of 1970. |
18 October 1985 |
|
Refusal to allow unrepresented appellants to call further evidence justified setting aside judgments and ordering retrial.
* Criminal/Civil procedure – Right to a fair trial – Adjournment and opportunity to adduce evidence – Refusal to allow unrepresented parties to call further evidence amounting to procedural unfairness warranting retrial.
|
9 October 1985 |
|
An appeal from a High Court ruling on a chamber summons is an order requiring leave; appeal struck out for lack of leave.
* Probate and Administration – administrators’ powers – sale by a single administrator under Probate and Administration Ordinance (s.100). * Civil procedure – chamber summons for directions under Probate Rules – distinction between an order and a decree. * Appeals – requirement of leave under s.4(1)(c) Appellate Jurisdiction Act where impugned decision is an order. * Procedural competence – failure to obtain leave renders appeal incompetent and liable to be struck out.
|
8 October 1985 |
|
Appeal dismissed: occupant did not acquire ownership by improvements; allowed time‑limited removal of her materials at her expense.
* Land law – ownership of unsurveyed plot – credibility of evidence about purchase and occupation. * Possession and improvements – occupancy does not confer ownership by making improvements. * Remedies for improvements – limited right to remove fixtures; possible compensation noted but not granted. * Appellate procedure – High Court review of conflicting lower court findings affirmed.
|
7 October 1985 |
|
Occupier who improved another’s plot with knowledge of ownership is not entitled to compensation but may remove improvements within set timeframe.
Property law – occupation of unsurveyed land – improvements made by occupier who knew land belonged to another – no entitlement to compensation; limited right to remove improvements at occupier’s expense – appellate review of findings of fact and credibility.
|
7 October 1985 |
|
Appellate court upheld murder conviction, preferring extra‑judicial statement and finding no provocation to reduce the offence.
* Criminal law – Evidence – credibility assessment – preference for extra‑judicial statement over inconsistent unsworn in‑court statement.
* Criminal law – Defences – provocation – when alleged provocation fails to reduce murder to manslaughter.
* Criminal law – Sufficiency of evidence – injuries and surrounding circumstances supporting conviction for murder.
|
4 October 1985 |
|
Belated self‑defence claim found fabricated; murder conviction and sentence upheld and appeal dismissed.
* Criminal law – murder – credibility of accused’s self‑defence/provocation plea; recent fabrication and improbability of late defence; inconsistent statements to police and witnesses; withdrawal of counsel and self‑representation – no prejudice.
|
3 October 1985 |
|
Appellant’s belated self-defence claim rejected as afterthought; conviction for murder upheld and appeal dismissed.
* Criminal law – Murder – proof beyond reasonable doubt – reliance on medical and circumstantial evidence (drag marks, hidden grave, recovered property). * Credibility – late and inconsistent defence account as afterthought – effect on self-defence/ provocation plea. * Confession/extra-judicial statements – statements to police that accused killed because deceased was "too proud" used as evidence of intent. * Criminal procedure – withdrawal of counsel – right to self-representation and requirement of showing prejudice before interference.
|
3 October 1985 |
|
Appeal dismissed: strong forensic and circumstantial evidence and implausible late self-defence claim upheld conviction.
* Criminal law – Murder – sufficiency of evidence and credibility of witnesses; identification of victim's property and physical evidence linking appellant to the scene. * Criminal law – Self-defence / provocation – late ad hoc defence raised at trial, improbable and unsupported by contemporaneous statements. * Criminal procedure – right to counsel and self-representation – withdrawal of counsel and appellant proceeding in person did not vitiate trial or cause prejudice.
|
3 October 1985 |
|
Court reduced a manifestly excessive ten-year manslaughter sentence to five years given provocation and mitigating factors.
* Criminal law – Manslaughter – Sentence manifestly excessive – Appeal court reducing sentence. * Mitigation – provocation/heat of passion, intoxication, deceased as aggressor, guilty plea, first offender, pre-sentence custody. * Sentence appellate review – adjustment of term without disturbing conviction.
|
2 October 1985 |
|
Appellate court reduced a manifestly excessive 10-year manslaughter sentence to 5 years given mitigation and circumstances.
Criminal law – Manslaughter – Sentence; mitigation: provocation/heat of passion, victim as aggressor, guilty plea, first offender, time in custody – appellate reduction of manifestly excessive sentence.
|
2 October 1985 |
|
Sentence for manslaughter reduced from 10 to 5 years due to mitigating circumstances and manifest excessiveness.
Criminal law – Manslaughter – sentence – manifestly excessive – mitigation: provocation, heat of passion, mutual intoxication, aggressor status, guilty plea, first offender, pre‑sentence custody – reduction of sentence.
|
2 October 1985 |
Civil Practice and Procedure - Appeals - Appeal against orders - Appeal against an order on an application for directions of the court u/r 105 of the Probate Rules - Whether ruling of the court is appealable as of right -Civil Procedure Code, ss.3, 22 and Order 43, Rule 2. |
1 October 1985 |
| September 1985 |
|
|
Reported
Contract - Fraud - Conspiracy between employee of appellant company and respondent company to defraud appellant - Agreement void and unenforceable.
Contract - Sale of machinery - No price agreed - Agreement void for uncertainty - S. 29 Law of Contract Ordinance, Cap. 433. |
1 September 1985 |
| August 1985 |
|
|
An exemption order under s.1(2)(b) of the Rent Restriction Act, approved by the National Assembly, is intra vires and not subject to required tenant consultation.
* Rent Restriction Act – s.1(2)(b) – Ministerial power, with National Assembly approval, to exempt premises or classes of premises from Act.
* Judicial review – validity of statutory exemption orders – order made in compliance with statute and Assembly approval is intra vires.
* Administrative law – consultation requirements – no duty to consult individual tenants before legislative exemption order.
* Rent disputes – courts will not interfere with statutorily-made exemptions or consequent rent increases absent illegality.
|
22 August 1985 |
|
Appellant's claim of provocation inadequate; conviction for murder upheld and appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – Murder – Fatal cutting of throat causing severed carotid arteries – No legal provocation where motive was revenge against another person – Appeal dismissed.
|
19 August 1985 |
|
A second appeal is incompetent where concurrent, evidence‑supported factual findings (e.g., identification) raise no question of law.
* Criminal law – appeals – second appeal – competency where concurrent factual findings by courts below are supported by evidence. * Criminal law – identification – recognition by complainant and engine number evidence are factual issues. * Appellate procedure – no proper question of law arises from factual disputes resolved by lower courts.
|
19 August 1985 |
|
Reported
Criminal Practice and Procedure - Restitution order- Rightful owner of property not established - Whether proper to make any order of restitution. |
16 August 1985 |
|
Additional evidence was inconclusive; acquittal upheld, but orders returning proceeds and cattle to the respondent set aside.
Criminal law – Appeal against acquittal – Additional evidence under s.151 and s.322(1) Criminal Procedure Code – Identification of stolen property – Insufficiency of vague/inconclusive evidence – Orders for restitution and disposition of proceeds; civil remedy for ownership.
|
16 August 1985 |
|
Acquittal for cattle theft upheld; orders returning proceeds and cattle set aside for lack of proved ownership.
Criminal law – appeal against acquittal – additional evidence (ss.151, 322(1) CrPC) – identification of stolen property – failure to prove ownership – inappropriate restitution and forfeiture of proceeds – civil remedy for property ownership.
|
16 August 1985 |
|
Acquittal upheld where additional evidence failed to prove identification or ownership; restitution orders set aside.
* Criminal procedure – Additional evidence under s.151 and s.322(1) CPC – Weight and adequacy of supplementary testimony in proving identification and ownership. * Evidence – Identification of stolen property – Prosecution must establish ownership and identity of animals beyond reasonable doubt. * Restitution and forfeiture – Court may set aside restitution or monetary return where ownership is unproven; proceeds may be forfeited to the State. * Civil remedy – Ownership disputes may be resolved by civil action when criminal proceedings do not determine ownership.
|
16 August 1985 |
|
Circumstantial and forensic evidence plus custody/abandonment satisfied s.293(e) to uphold a murder conviction during a robbery.
* Criminal law – murder in course of robbery – circumstantial evidence and identification. * Forensic linkage of remains to abducted victim – clothes, earrings, bones, skull and hair. * Section 293(e) Penal Code – liability where accused had custody/possession and abandoned victim causing death. * Absence of direct evidence of cause of death does not preclude murder conviction when circumstantial evidence establishes causation and guilt.
|
15 August 1985 |
|
Conviction upheld where appellant abducted and abandoned a child, causing death under section 203(e) of the Penal Code.
Criminal law – murder – circumstantial evidence and identification – discovery of human remains and personal effects – custody, abandonment and causation under s.203(e) Penal Code – conviction upheld.
|
15 August 1985 |
|
Circumstantial and identification evidence justified a murder conviction under section 203(e) despite no direct proof of cause of death.
Criminal law – murder in course of robbery – circumstantial evidence; eyewitness identification by headlight sighting; forensic linkage of remains; causation under section 203(e) of the Penal Code; conviction justified despite no direct proof of exact cause of death.
|
15 August 1985 |
|
Appeal against murder conviction dismissed; no legal provocation or established insanity, conviction upheld.
Criminal law – Murder – Unprovoked fatal assault with a weapon – Eyewitness evidence and admission – Insanity defence not established – No legal provocation.
|
15 August 1985 |
|
Insanity plea and provocation claim rejected; murder conviction upheld on eyewitness and admission evidence.
Criminal law – Murder – Eyewitness evidence and admission to police – Plea of insanity – Rejection of insanity defence – Provocation – absence of legal provocation to reduce culpability.
|
15 August 1985 |
|
Appeal dismissed: eyewitness evidence and admission supported murder conviction; insanity and provocation defences rejected.
* Criminal law – Murder – Evidence – Eyewitness testimony and extra-judicial admission sufficient to convict.
* Criminal law – Defences – Insanity plea: absence of evidence to support non compos mentis finding.
* Criminal law – Defences – Provocation: no legal provocation shown; belief in witchcraft not a defence.
|
15 August 1985 |
| July 1985 |
|
|
Identification corroborated by recovered clothing and an incriminating prison letter warranted dismissal of the appellant's appeal.
* Criminal law – Identification evidence – sufficiency and reliability where observation occurred at dusk and corroborated by recovery of clothing. * Criminal law – Admissibility and probative value of a letter from custody – use to rebut alibi and show fabrication. * Criminal appeal – assessment of totality of evidence and entitlement of trial court to reject alibi.
|
26 July 1985 |
|
Identification corroborated by recovered clothing and a prison letter undermining the alibi; appeal dismissed.
* Criminal law – identification evidence – reliability of eyewitness identification at dusk and corroboration by recovered clothing.
* Criminal procedure – admissibility of documentary evidence – prison letter alleged to procure false testimony.
* Defence of alibi – assessment and rejection where inconsistencies and fabrication are shown.
* Appeal – safety of conviction where identification and corroborative evidence are strong.
|
26 July 1985 |