|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2017 |
|
|
Prison appellant’s omission to complete Form B/1 excused; substituted memorandum valid and preliminary objections overruled.
Criminal procedure – appeals from prison – Rule 68 notice vs Rule 75(1) Form B/1 – omission by officer‑in‑charge – substituted memorandum under Rule 73(2) – Court’s discretion under Rules 2, 4(2)(b) and 72(5) to overlook non‑compliance in interests of justice.
|
20 December 2017 |
|
Conviction overturned where identification, recent‑possession, inadmissible cautioned statements and weak circumstantial chain failed to prove murder.
Criminal law — Identification evidence — Relevance where accused admitted hiring but no eye‑witness to killing; Doctrine of recent possession — requirements for application; Cautioned statements — admissibility and statutory time limit under Criminal Procedure Act; Circumstantial evidence — necessity to exclude other reasonable hypotheses and prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
|
15 December 2017 |
|
Non‑recording of reasons for a magistrate’s takeover violated section 214(1) CPA, rendering subsequent proceedings and judgments null and prompting retrial.
Criminal procedure – Transfer of partly heard trial – Section 214(1) CPA – Mandatory recording of reasons for magistrate change – Failure to assign reasons renders successor’s proceedings a nullity – Retrial ordered.
|
15 December 2017 |
|
Omission of required address-for-service statements from the record of appeal renders the appeal incompetent and is fatal.
Civil procedure – Appeal record – Rule 96(1)(b) CRA Rules – statement of address for service – primary/core document – omission renders appeal incompetent; appeal struck out.
|
15 December 2017 |
|
High Court's uncommunicated dismissal breached the right to be heard; appeal quashed and revived for hearing.
* Criminal appeal – dismissal versus striking out – distinction and consequences
* Right to be heard (audi alteram partem) – dismissal without hearing is unlawful
* Timeliness of notice of appeal – notice given within statutory period renders appeal competent
* Remedy – quashing of illegal dismissal, revival of appeal, reassignment, and fast‑tracking for hearing
|
15 December 2017 |
|
A defective charge nullified convictions; poor prosecution evidence precluded retrial, prompting the appellant's unconditional release.
Criminal law — Charge particulars — Defective charge (omission/failure to reference statute) renders proceedings a nullity; notice of appeal defect (wrong court named) not fatal if particulars clear; identification, PF3 admissibility and chain of evidence critical; where prosecution evidence in nullified record is insufficient, retrial may be refused and release ordered.
|
15 December 2017 |
|
Conviction quashed where recent-possession, identification and cautioned statements were inadequately proved and circumstantial chain failed.
Criminal law – identification evidence; doctrine of recent possession – requirements (possession, ownership, recent theft, subject of charge); inadmissibility of statements taken outside statutory period; circumstantial evidence – necessity of complete unbroken chain of inference.
|
14 December 2017 |
|
Inadequate summing up to assessors on vital legal points vitiated the murder trial; retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure – duty to sum up to assessors; assessors’ directions – vital points of law; defence of alibi (s.194(4) CPA) – notice requirement; defence of property (s.18 Penal Code); malice aforethought (s.200 Penal Code) – indicia; adverse inference for failure to call crucial witnesses; credibility of sole eyewitness; trial without aid of assessors vitiates proceedings.
|
14 December 2017 |
|
Omission of the victim’s identity in armed robbery particulars is an incurable defect, vitiating convictions and requiring release.
Criminal law — Armed robbery (s.287A Penal Code) — Particulars of offence must state the person against whom violence or threat was directed; omission is an incurable defect — Charge-sheet particulars (s.132 Criminal Procedure Act) — Failure to give essential particulars vitiates trial — Convictions quashed; insufficient evidence on conspiracy count.
|
14 December 2017 |
|
A judgment written by a successor magistrate without recorded reasons is nullity; trial and appeal set aside and remitted.
Criminal procedure – Succession of magistrates – Section 214(1) CPA requires recorded reasons for successor to assume jurisdiction; judgment must be written by or under direction of the presiding magistrate (s.312(1)) – Judgment composed by magistrate who did not try the case is nullity – High Court’s remedial power under s.214(2) CPA – Right to fair trial and requirements for re‑trial.
|
14 December 2017 |
|
Leave to appeal in land cases must be granted under section 47(1) LDCA; leave under AJA s.5(1)(c) is invalid; appeal struck out.
* Land law – Appeals – Leave to appeal from High Court decisions originating in land disputes – Exclusive application of section 47(1) of the Land Disputes Courts Act – leave granted under section 5(1)(c) AJA inapplicable and invalid; incompetence of appeal.
|
14 December 2017 |
|
Cautioned statement recorded after statutory time was expunged; remaining evidence insufficient to prove possession beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – admissibility of cautioned statements – statutory time limits (s.50, s.51 Criminal Procedure Act) – expungement for non‑compliance; Evidence Act s.34B – admission of absent witness statement after unsuccessful efforts to procure attendance; discrepancies in witness evidence – minor inconsistencies not necessarily fatal; burden of proof – prosecution duty to prove possession/ownership beyond reasonable doubt.
|
14 December 2017 |
|
A DPP's s36(2) written certificate denying bail binds the court; reasons for the certificate are not required.
Criminal procedure – Bail – DPP's certificate under s.36(2) EOCCA – Effect and requirements; statutory test: written certificate; states likely prejudice to safety/interest; relates to pending criminal proceedings; no requirement to disclose reasons; authority: Ally Nuru Dirie; DPP v. Li Ling Ling.
|
14 December 2017 |
|
A conviction based on a charge lumping multiple offences into one count is a nullity; retrial ordered after proper charge filed.
Criminal procedure – Charge particulars – Requirement that each distinct offence be set out in separate count (s.135(2) CPA) – Charge must give reasonable information as to nature of offence (s.132 CPA) – Lumped charges incurably defective – Proceedings and judgments founded on defective charge are nullities – Retrial ordered in interests of justice after appropriate charge sheet filed by DPP.
|
14 December 2017 |
|
Applicant's review alleging error for upholding conviction after expunging psychiatric evidence dismissed as disguised rehearing.
* Criminal procedure – Review jurisdiction under Rule 66(1) – "Error apparent on the face of the record" defined – requires an obvious, patent mistake not needing prolonged re-assessment.
* Evidence – Expungement of a psychiatric/medical report and attendant witness evidence – effect on conviction – re-assessment of remaining oral evidence cannot be remedied by review.
* Procedure – Review application that effectively seeks re‑hearing of an appeal is impermissible and will be dismissed.
|
14 December 2017 |
|
Conviction quashed because the charge failed to allege the essential element of 'threatening' under section 132(2)(a).
Criminal law – Attempted rape – Essential elements of charge – Charge must disclose how intent was manifested (section 132(2)(a): threatening) – Defective/incurably defective charge – Conviction quashed.
|
14 December 2017 |
|
Dismissing an appeal without hearing the applicant violated the right to be heard; appeal reinstated for rehearing.
Criminal appeal procedure – dismissal v. striking out – right to be heard (audi alteram partem) – notice of intention to appeal – competency and reviving appeals.
|
14 December 2017 |
|
Conviction for murder quashed where missing exhibits and uncalls of material witness left circumstantial evidence insufficient.
* Criminal law – murder – circumstantial evidence – requirement for cogent corroboration to exclude reasonable hypothesis of innocence.
* Evidence – exhibits – failure to tender allegedly incriminating clothes despite laboratory testing undermines prosecution case.
* Evidence – witnesses – failure to call a material witness permits adverse inference (s.122 Evidence Act).
* Criminal procedure – last-seen and suspicious circumstances alone are insufficient to sustain conviction for murder.
|
14 December 2017 |
|
The applicant’s failure to cite the specific sub‑paragraph of Rule 66(1) rendered the review application incompetent.
* Civil procedure – Review – Rule 66(1) Court of Appeal Rules – Review powers exercisable only where grounds in paragraph (a)–(e) are specified. * Civil procedure – Form of application – Rule 48(1) requires citation of specific rule and statement of grounds; non‑citation renders application incompetent. * Precedent – earlier unobjected cases distinguishable where non‑citation is raised.
|
14 December 2017 |
|
The applicant's failure to specify the paragraph under Rule 66(1) renders the review application incompetent.
* Civil procedure — Review — Rule 66(1) Court of Appeal Rules — Requirement to indicate specific paragraph (a)‑(e) relied upon — Non‑citation renders application incompetent.
* Civil procedure — Form of application — Rule 48(1) — Every application must cite specific rule and state grounds for relief.
* Jurisprudence — Mere citation of enabling provision without sub‑rule is incurably defective; prior cases distinguishable if issue not raised.
|
14 December 2017 |
|
A defective charge (omitting "without her consent") rendered the trial and appeal null; weak prosecution evidence prompted unconditional release.
Criminal law – Rape – Defective particulars of charge (omission of "without her consent" and lack of statutory reference) – nullity of trial and appeal proceedings – exercise of section 4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act – discretion to order retrial vs unconditional release where prosecution evidence is weak; identification and PF3 evidentiary issues considered.
|
14 December 2017 |
|
Inadequate directions to assessors on alibi and relatives’ evidence rendered the trial a nullity; retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure – Trial with assessors – duty of trial judge to adequately sum up on alibi and on the value of relatives’ evidence – inadequate summing-up vitiates trial; retrial ordered.
|
14 December 2017 |
|
Omission to identify the person subjected to violence in armed robbery particulars renders the charge incurably defective and convictions unsustainable.
* Criminal law – Armed robbery (s.287A Penal Code) – particulars of offence – requirement to state person against whom violence or threat was directed – essential ingredient – omission renders charge incurably defective. * Criminal procedure – charge sufficiency (s.132 Criminal Procedure Act) – accused must be informed of essential elements to enable fair defence. * Appeal – quashing of trial and appellate proceedings where charge fatally defective; insufficiency of evidence on conspiracy count.
|
13 December 2017 |
|
Review dismissed: Court found no manifest error and no denial of hearing in striking out the appeal.
Criminal procedure — Review jurisdiction — Scope limited to errors apparent on the face of the record; not a substitute for appeal — Appealability — Whether a High Court order directing retrial finally determines the criminal charge — Right to be heard — Striking out incompetent appeal does not deprive party of hearing where parties were heard on preliminary legal point.
|
13 December 2017 |
|
Appellate court reduced an excessive manslaughter sentence after trial judge ignored mitigating factors and relied on irrelevant considerations.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Appellate interference where sentence manifestly excessive – Trial court’s failure to consider mitigating factors – Improper reliance on use of weapon as aggravation – Reduction of sentence.
|
13 December 2017 |
|
Conviction for unlawful possession of a government trophy upheld; evidence sufficient despite missing seizure documentation.
* Criminal law – Wildlife Conservation Act – unlawful possession of government trophy (lion skin) – proof of possession by arrest and opening of luggage on roadside stop * Evidence – credibility and corroboration of prosecution witnesses; admissibility and weight of co-accused’s testimony * Evidence – absence of seizure certificate/search warrant does not necessarily invalidate strong direct evidence of possession * Criminal procedure – judgment must state points for determination (s.312 CPA) * Sentencing – sentence within statutory range under Wildlife Conservation Act
|
13 December 2017 |
|
Appeal allowed: conviction quashed because charge failed to allege the essential element (threat) of attempted rape.
Criminal law – Attempted rape – particulars of offence must disclose essential elements – where statute requires manifestation of intention (e.g. threat under s.132(2)(a)), the charge must allege it – incurably defective charge renders conviction unsafe – conviction and sentence quashed.
|
13 December 2017 |
|
Conviction quashed where accused was tried under a repealed provision; no retrial ordered and appellant released.
Criminal law – defective charge where statute repealed and replaced by Sexual Offences Act 1998; substitution of charge in judgment without notice violates fair trial; conviction quashed for being founded on non-existent provision; retrial discretionary — not ordered where evidence insufficient and interests of justice require release.
|
13 December 2017 |
|
Inadequate directions to assessors on alibi and relatives’ evidence rendered the murder trial a nullity; retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure — Murder trial — Duty to adequately sum up to assessors — Alibi: conditions, particulars and legal consequences — Assessment of evidence of relatives/close neighbours and need for caution/corroboration — Inadequate summing up renders trial without aid of assessors and vitiates conviction.
|
13 December 2017 |
|
Dispute over enjoyment of jointly owned registered land is not time-barred; court ordered buyout or sale, rejecting unproven special damages.
Land law – joint registered ownership – dispute over enjoyment/use not ownership – limitation of actions inapplicable; improper reliance on alien distribution document – co-owner remedies: buyout or sale and equal division of proceeds; special damages must be proved.
|
12 December 2017 |
|
An incomplete record of appeal (missing affidavit verification and wrong attachment) renders the appeal incompetent and is struck out.
* Civil procedure – completeness of record of appeal – supporting affidavit must contain verification clause and jurat – Rule 96(1)(f) Court of Appeal Rules, 2009.
* Constitutional law – Article 107A(2)(e) – limits: Article does not permit departure from fundamental procedural requirements or salutary rules of procedure.
* Appeal competency – defective record of appeal (missing jurat/verification and wrong attachment of decree instead of drawn order) renders appeal incompetent and liable to be struck out.
* Court powers – suo motu discovery of defects in record may lead to striking out appeal; no order as to costs where struck out on Court's own motion.
|
12 December 2017 |
|
Registry delay supplying certified copies does not justify striking out a notice of appeal where Rule 90 compliance is shown.
Civil procedure – Court of Appeal Rules – striking out notice of appeal under Rule 89(2) for failure to take essential steps – compliance with Rule 90(1) & (2) by applying for certified copies within 30 days – registry delay does not justify striking out – reliance on Transcontinental Forwarders precedent.
|
12 December 2017 |
|
Inadequate summing up to assessors on vital legal points vitiated the murder trial and warranted a retrial.
* Criminal procedure – assessors – mandatory summing up to assessors on all vital points of law – inadequate direction renders trial without aid of assessors and vitiates proceedings. * Defence of alibi – s.194(4) CPA – notice and particulars and consequences must be explained to assessors. * Defence of property and malice aforethought – assessors must be directed on relevant legal tests. * Adverse inference – effect of prosecution’s failure to call crucial witnesses must be addressed.
|
12 December 2017 |
|
An appeal is incompetent and struck out where the record omits trial exhibits admitted as court exhibits.
Civil procedure — Appeal record completeness — Rule 96(1)(f) Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 — requirement to include all documents put in evidence; Civil Procedure Code O. XIII r.4(1) and r.7(1) — endorsement and inclusion of admitted exhibits; Effect of amended pleadings — originals cease to have effect; Interpretation of Laws Act s.20(1) — permissibility of short title citation.
|
12 December 2017 |
|
Stay of execution refused because applicant failed to provide required security and could not pledge disputed land.
Civil procedure – Stay of execution – Rule 11(2) Court of Appeal Rules – cumulative requirements: notice of appeal, good cause, and security for due performance – security cannot be a property not owned by the applicant – undertaking to provide security may suffice if realistic and time-limited.
|
12 December 2017 |
|
|
12 December 2017 |
|
Cautioned statement recorded outside statutory time was expunged; remaining evidence failed to prove possession beyond reasonable doubt.
* Criminal procedure – cautioned statements – statutory four‑hour limit (s.50 Criminal Procedure Act) and requirement for extension (s.51) – non‑compliance renders statement inadmissible and subject to expungement.
* Evidence – statements of unavailable witnesses – admissibility under evidentiary provisions where maker is shown to be a passenger and prosecution made efforts to produce witness.
* Evidence – discrepancies in witness testimony – distinction between minor inconsistencies and contradictions going to the gist of the case.
* Criminal burden – prosecution must prove possession/ownership beyond reasonable doubt; single sighting of placing a bag insufficient to establish possession/ownership.
|
12 December 2017 |
|
Appellate court reduced a manslaughter sentence after the trial judge overlooked mitigating factors and relied on irrelevant considerations.
Criminal law — Manslaughter — Sentence — Alleged excessiveness — Failure to consider mitigating factors — Reliance on irrelevant consideration (use of sharp weapon) — Appellate interference and substitution of sentence.
|
12 December 2017 |
|
A charge lumping distinct offences into one count is incurably defective, warranting quashal and a retrial.
* Criminal law – Charge particulars – Multiple incidents of same offence must be charged separately – requirement under s.135(2) CPA and s.132 CPA for sufficient particulars; defective charge renders proceedings a nullity. * Appellate jurisdiction – Exercise of revisional powers under s.4(2) AJA to quash proceedings and order retrial in interest of justice. * Retrial – permissible where original trial was illegal or defective and interest of justice requires it.
|
12 December 2017 |
|
An unequivocal plea of guilty bars challenge to conviction; mandatory Wildlife Act 20-year sentence cannot be reduced.
* Criminal law – Plea of guilty – Unequivocal plea and admissions bar appeal against conviction under s.360(1) CPA; exceptions in Laurence Mpinga. * Wildlife Conservation Act – Unlawful possession of government trophies – statutory mandatory minimum sentence where value exceeds Tshs.1,000,000 (s.86(2)(c)(ii)). * Sentence – appellate court cannot reduce a statutory mandatory minimum.
|
12 December 2017 |
|
Arson conviction upheld; life sentence set aside as illegal and reduced to lawful term resulting in immediate release.
• Criminal law – Arson – Identification by eyewitnesses and corroboration – credibility of relatives' evidence.
• Sentencing – "Liable to imprisonment for life" construed as maximum, not mandatory sentence.
• Sentencing jurisdiction – Section 170(1)(a) CPA limits subordinate courts to five years' imprisonment unless statutory exception or confirmation applies.
• Appellate powers – Court may set aside illegal sentence and substitute lawful sentence under section 4(2) AJA.
|
12 December 2017 |
|
Appeal allowed: unsafe visual identification at night led to quashing of conviction and setting aside of sentence.
Criminal law – Visual identification – Waziri Amani warning – necessity to eliminate possibilities of mistaken identity; importance of earliest opportunity to name suspect; adequacy of lighting and descriptive particulars; caution where witnesses may have motive or grudges; appellate review where lower courts misdirect on identification evidence.
|
12 December 2017 |
|
Conviction based solely on uncertain nighttime visual identification was unsafe; appeal allowed and conviction quashed.
* Criminal law – Visual identification – Waziri Amani caution – necessity to eliminate all reasonable possibilities of mistaken identity; factors: light source/intensity, distance, duration, familiarity, description of clothing, earliest opportunity to name. * Evidence – Delay or failure to name suspect at earliest opportunity undermines reliability. * Appeal – Second appellate court may interfere where courts below misapprehend or misdirect on material facts.
|
12 December 2017 |
|
Absence of summing-up to assessors renders the trial a nullity; conviction and death sentence quashed, retrial ordered.
* Criminal procedure – Role of assessors – Trial Judge’s duty to sum up the evidence and law to assessors – Sections 265 and 298(1) CPA – Absence or non-recording of summing-up vitiates proceedings – retrial de novo ordered.
|
12 December 2017 |
|
Requesting certified copies within time prevents striking out a notice of appeal for failure to take essential steps.
Civil procedure – Appeals – Rule 89(2) (striking out notices) – Essential steps – Request for certified copies under Rule 90(1) and (2) – Failure of Registry to supply copies prevents finding of failure to take essential steps; reliance on Transcontinental Forwarders precedent.
|
11 December 2017 |
|
Review refused: review jurisdiction is limited and cannot be used to re‑argue issues already decided on appeal.
Court of Appeal — Review jurisdiction under Rule 66(1) — Limited grounds (manifest error on face of record; denial of hearing; nullity; lack of jurisdiction; judgment procured illegally/fraud/perjury) — Review sparingly exercised — Review cannot be used to re‑argue matters already decided on appeal.
|
11 December 2017 |
|
Failure to sum up vital legal issues to assessors vitiated the trial, prompting quashing and ordering a retrial.
Criminal procedure – Trials with assessors – Duty of trial Judge to sum up vital points of law to assessors; Murder – ingredients and proof of malice aforethought; Defence of alibi – requirement to put to assessors; Witness discrepancies – relevance and duty to address to assessors; Failure to fully use assessors' opinions vitiates trial and compels retrial.
|
11 December 2017 |
|
Failure to put vital legal issues (murder ingredients, alibi) to assessors vitiated the trial; retrial ordered.
* Criminal law – role of assessors – trial judge’s duty to explain and put vital legal points to assessors; failure to do so vitiates trial. * Criminal law – murder – need to put ingredients (malice aforethought) and material defences (alibi) to assessors. * Criminal procedure – discrepancies in evidence should be addressed to assessors for opinion.
|
11 December 2017 |
|
An unequivocal guilty plea bars appeal against conviction; mandatory 20-year Wildlife Act sentence cannot be reduced.
* Criminal law – Plea of guilty – When a plea is unequivocal and bars appeal against conviction under s.360(1) CPA. * Wildlife law – Unlawful possession of government trophies – Mandatory minimum sentence under s.86(2)(c)(ii) Wildlife Conservation Act. * Appeals – Limited grounds allowing challenge to conviction entered on plea of guilty.
|
9 December 2017 |
|
Review under Rule 66(1) refused: no manifest error or denial of fair hearing; application dismissed with costs.
* Civil procedure — Review under Rule 66(1) Court of Appeal Rules — scope restricted to grounds (a)–(e) — error must be obvious and patent on the face of the record. * Right to fair hearing — alleged denial where advocate absent — court may refuse adjournment where prior opportunities existed and further delay prejudices respondent. * Finality of litigation — review power to be exercised rarely and sparingly; litigation must come to an end. * Failure to prosecute — repeated adjournments and lack of substitute counsel justify dismissal and defeat review.
|
9 December 2017 |