|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| June 2018 |
|
|
Failure to enter a conviction renders the trial judgment a nullity; matter remitted for proper judgment and sentencing.
Criminal procedure — Failure to enter a formal conviction renders judgment and sentence a nullity; requirement to comply with sections 235(1) and 312(2) CPA; sentencing must follow correct statutory subsection given victim's age; revisional powers under section 4(2) AJA to quash and remit.
|
7 June 2018 |
|
Failure to enter a formal conviction renders the judgment null and sentence must reflect statutory category based on victim's age.
Criminal procedure — Trial court must enter a formal conviction specifying the offence and statutory provision (ss.235(1), 312(2) CPA) — Failure to enter conviction is a fatal irregularity — Appellate/revisional jurisdiction (s.4(2) AJA) — Sentencing under s.138C(2) Penal Code depends on victim's age.
|
7 June 2018 |
|
Identification contradictions and uncorroborated retracted cautioned statements rendered the robbery convictions unsafe.
Criminal law – armed robbery – identification evidence – contradictions on source/intensity of light and number of assailants – identification parade irregularity (no prior description) – retracted cautioned statements require independent corroboration – convictions quashed.
|
7 June 2018 |
|
Doctrine of recent possession upheld applicant's armed robbery conviction despite untendered PF3 and an unpersuasive alibi.
* Criminal law — Armed robbery — Doctrine of recent possession — stolen property found with suspect within short time and positively identified by registration card; presumption against unexplained possession.
* Evidence — Failure to tender PF3 and weapon — absence not fatal where credible oral evidence and identification prove the offence.
* Criminal procedure — Defence of alibi — notice requirements (s.194 CPA) and weight to be accorded; appellate intervention where lower courts fail to consider material defence.
|
7 June 2018 |
|
A written two-year lease superseded a temporary agency; the lease expired and no subsisting contract supported damages, so appeal allowed.
Agency – temporary appointment to facilitate handover; Lease – written two-year agreement superseding prior agency; Parol evidence rule – written contract cannot be varied by oral evidence; Expiry of contract – no subsisting agreement at time of suit; Damages – award set aside for lack of contractual basis; Possession – respondent has no right to remain on site.
|
7 June 2018 |
|
The applicant's notice of appeal was sufficient; alleged trial non‑compliance with section 231 must be argued in the appeal.
Criminal procedure – Notice of appeal – Requirement to state briefly nature of appeal and order appealed against – Compliance with Rule 68(2) and Forms B/B1; Criminal procedure – Trial courts’ duty under section 231 of the Criminal Procedure Act – Alleged non‑compliance to be raised in substantive appeal, not by preliminary objection.
|
6 June 2018 |
|
A criminal charge citing non-existent statutory provisions is incurably defective, warranting quash of conviction and release of the applicant.
* Criminal law – Charge drafting – citation of non-existent statutory provisions – incurably defective charge – violates s.135(a)(ii) CPA.
* Appellate jurisdiction – revisional powers under s.4(2) AJA – quashing proceedings and conviction where charge is void.
* Procedure – retrial inappropriate where foundational charge is legally non-existent.
|
6 June 2018 |
|
A charge citing non-existent statutory provisions is incurably defective and vitiates the appellant's conviction; proceedings quashed.
* Criminal law – Charge – Citation of non-existent statutory provisions – incurable defect – nullity of proceedings. * Criminal law – Rape – necessity to cite correct subsection/category (distinct ingredients). * Appellate jurisdiction – Revisional powers (s.4(2) AJA) – quashing convictions and setting aside sentences. * Remedy – No retrial where charge foundation is defective; release unless held for another matter.
|
6 June 2018 |
|
Failure to enter a conviction renders the trial judgment a nullity; proper statutory sentencing must be applied.
Criminal procedure — mandatory entry of conviction — sections 235(1) and 312(2) Criminal Procedure Act — failure to enter conviction is fatal nullity; Sentencing — section 138C Penal Code — distinction between subsections for victims under fifteen years and others; Revisional jurisdiction — section 4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act — power to quash and remit defective judgments.
|
6 June 2018 |
|
An application for revision lacking the lower court proceedings and extracted order is incompetent and must be struck out.
* Appellate procedure — Revision under s.4(3) AJA — Requirement to attach lower court proceedings and extracted order — Rule 65 and time/service requirements — Incomplete application incompetent and liable to be struck out.
|
6 June 2018 |
|
Conviction for armed robbery upheld on recent possession despite missing exhibits; unnotified alibi found unconvincing.
Criminal law — Armed robbery — Doctrine of recent possession; identification by registration card; sufficiency of credible oral evidence despite non-tendering of PF3 and weapon; alibi requirements under section 194 CPA and impact of non-notification.
|
6 June 2018 |
|
Committal proceedings complied with section 246(2) CPA; no revision required and record remitted to the High Court.
Criminal procedure – Committal proceedings – compliance with section 246(2) Criminal Procedure Act (reading of information/statements to accused) – preliminary hearing – alleged defective committal – Court of Appeal’s revisional jurisdiction – remittal of record to High Court.
|
6 June 2018 |
|
Appeals from Primary Courts are incompetent before the Court of Appeal without a High Court certificate on a point of law.
* Criminal procedure – Appeals from Primary Courts – Mandatory High Court certificate on a point of law under section 6(7)(b) AJA – absence of certificate renders appeal incompetent.
* Appellate jurisdiction – Competency – statutory preconditions – non-compliance leads to striking out appeal.
* Procedure – respondent absent and not notified – Court may still strike out appeal where jurisdictional defect exists.
|
6 June 2018 |
|
An appeal from a Primary Court requires a High Court certificate on a point of law; absence renders the appeal incompetent and struck out.
Criminal appeal — appeal from Primary Court — requirement of High Court certificate on point of law under s.6(7)(b) AJA — mandatory jurisdictional requirement — absence of certificate renders appeal incompetent and liable to be struck out; procedural non-notification considered but competence issue decisive.
|
6 June 2018 |
|
Court of Appeal finds committal complied with s246(2) CPA; remit record to High Court to proceed with trial.
* Criminal procedure – Committal proceedings – Requirement under section 246(2) CPA that information/statements be read to the accused – compliance and effect of omission.
* Appellate jurisdiction – Referral under section 4(3) Appellate Jurisdiction Act – when revisional intervention by Court of Appeal is appropriate.
* Remedy – Remittal to the High Court to proceed where no fatal defect in committal is shown.
|
6 June 2018 |
|
A charge sheet failing to cite the specific rape subsection (130(2)(e)) renders the trial unfair and conviction unsustainable.
Criminal procedure — Charge sheet particulars — Requirement to cite specific statutory provision — Rape: necessity to state applicable category under section 130(2)(e) when victim is under eighteen — Incurably defective charge vitiates trial — Remedy: quash proceedings and set aside sentence (s.4(2) AJA).
|
5 June 2018 |
|
Failure to cite the specific rape subsection renders the charge incurably defective and convictions are quashed.
Criminal law – Rape – charge sheet must cite specific subsection/category under section 130(2)/(3) where facts indicate age-related category; defective charge; fair trial; incurable defect; remedy under section 4(2) AJA – quash proceedings and set aside sentences; refusal to remit to DPP to re‑charge.
|
5 June 2018 |
|
Absence of written summing-up to assessors renders the trial a nullity; appellant's conviction quashed and retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure – High Court trials with assessors (s.265 CPA); Summing-up to assessors and recording of opinions (s.298(1) CPA) – Written summing-up required; Oral, unrecorded summing-up insufficient – Non-compliance vitiates proceedings; Conviction quashed and retrial ordered; Revisional jurisdiction (s.4(2) AJA).
|
5 June 2018 |
|
Failure to record the judge’s summing up to assessors vitiates the trial, requiring conviction quashed and retrial.
Criminal procedure – High Court trials with assessors – Sections 265 and 298(1) Criminal Procedure Act – Summing up to assessors mandatory and must be recorded; oral unrecorded summing up insufficient – Failure to record vitiates proceedings, conviction and sentence – Appellate court may raise procedural irregularity suo motu.
|
5 June 2018 |
|
A revision application under s.4(3) AJA is incompetent and struck out if it omits the impugned proceedings and extracted order.
Civil procedure – Revision under s.4(3) AJA – Applicant must attach lower court proceedings and extracted/drawn order; Rule 65(4)&(5) – time limits and service requirements; Incompetent application lacking record to be struck out; Court may raise defect sua motu.
|
5 June 2018 |
|
A defective charge omitting the specific statutory category of rape deprived the appellant of a fair trial, warranting quashing of convictions.
Criminal procedure – charge sheet requirements – omission to cite specific sub‑category of rape under section 130(2)(e) renders charge incurably defective; unfair trial; conviction and sentences quashed under section 4(2) AJA; no remittal to DPP where re‑charging would prejudice accused.
|
4 June 2018 |
|
Absence of a written summing up to assessors breaches s.298(1) CPA, vitiates proceedings, and mandates quashing and retrial.
* Criminal procedure – role of assessors – necessity for judge to sum up evidence and law to assessors (s.265, s.298(1) CPA).
* Summing up to assessors must be recorded (writing) to permit appellate review; oral summing up not reflected in record is fatal.
* Summing up is effectively mandatory despite the word "may" in s.298(1).
* Non‑compliance with s.298(1) renders proceedings a nullity; conviction quashed and retrial ordered (s.4(2) AJA).
|
4 June 2018 |
|
The appellant's conviction was quashed because the charge failed to specify the child‑rape subsection and correct sentencing provision.
Criminal law — Charge particulars — Rape — Necessity to specify specific subsection (s130(2)(e)) when victim is a child and the correct sentencing provision (s131(3)); defective charge deprives accused of fair trial; Court may, under s4(2) AJA, quash proceedings and conviction and set aside sentence; no retrial where no valid charge exists; duty on prosecution and trial courts to ensure charges correctly framed.
|
4 June 2018 |
|
The applicant's omnibus motion for extension of time and stay of execution was incompetent and struck out.
Civil procedure – omnibus application – combining extension of time (single-justice jurisdiction) and stay of execution (three-justice panel) is incompetent; Extension of time – applicant must show good or sufficient cause under Rule 10; Stay of execution – jurisdictional competence of a three-justice panel; Procedure – application for extension should precede any application for stay.
|
2 June 2018 |
|
An appeal originating from a Primary Court is incompetent and is struck out if the High Court fails to certify a point of law.
Appeal from Primary Court — Competence — Mandatory High Court certificate on point of law under s.6(7)(b) Appellate Jurisdiction Act — Absence of certificate renders appeal incompetent and subject to striking out; Rule 80(6) (notice/attendance) does not cure jurisdictional defect.
|
2 June 2018 |
|
A defective charge omitting the correct rape subsection invalidates the applicant's trial; conviction quashed and no retrial.
* Criminal law – charging – requirement to state specific statutory subsection when particulars show the victim's age – charge must disclose category of rape under s.130(2) and correct sentencing provision under s.131. * Fair trial – defective charge that omits the correct substantive and sentencing subsections prejudices accused and vitiates conviction. * Appellate jurisdiction – exercise of revisionary powers under AJA s.4(2) to quash proceedings and sentence; no retrial where no valid charge exists.
|
1 June 2018 |
|
Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to extend time for filing High Court appeal notices under section 11(1) AJA.
* Appellate jurisdiction – extension of time – Section 11(1) Appellate Jurisdiction Act – exclusive power of the High Court (or subordinate court with extended powers) to extend time to give notice of intention to appeal.
|
1 June 2018 |
| May 2018 |
|
|
Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to extend time under s.11(1) AJA; such applications must be made to the High Court.
Appellate jurisdiction – extension of time to file notice of appeal – s.11(1) Appellate Jurisdiction Act vests exclusive power in High Court (or subordinate court with extended powers) – Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to grant such extension – application misconceived and struck out.
|
31 May 2018 |
|
A notice of appeal must state the High Court order's nature; failure renders the appeal incompetent and it is struck out.
Criminal procedure – Appeal – Notice of appeal must state nature of High Court decision – Rule 68(1) & (2), Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 – Defective notice that fails to identify the High Court order renders appeal incompetent – appeal struck out.
|
16 May 2018 |
|
The applicants' appeals were struck out because their notices failed to state the High Court order or the nature of the order appealed against.
Criminal procedure – Appeal – Notice of appeal – Rule 68(1) & (2) Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 – Mandatory requirement to state the "nature" of the decision, order or finding appealed against – Failure to identify the High Court order renders notice defective and appeal incompetent.
|
16 May 2018 |
|
A charge citing a non-existent statutory provision is incurably defective, nullifying conviction and warranting release.
Criminal procedure – Charge sheet requirements – section 135 CPA – necessity to cite correct statutory provision and subsection; defective citation of a non-existent provision renders proceedings a nullity and is incurable under section 388 CPA; revisional powers under section 4(2) AJA to quash conviction and order release; retrial not ordered where charge is effectively non-existent.
|
16 May 2018 |
|
A charge failing to cite the creating enactment renders trial a nullity and conviction is set aside.
Criminal procedure – charge-sheet requirements – statement of offence must identify the enactment creating the offence (CPA ss.132, 135) – defective charge vitiates trial; nullity of proceedings – retrial discretionary; interests of justice may preclude retrial; sentencing for young first offenders (Penal Code s.131(2)(a)).
|
16 May 2018 |
|
A defective charge citing a non-existent statutory provision vitiated the trial; conviction quashed and appellant released.
Criminal procedure; charge sheet must cite correct statutory provision (s135 CPA); particulars must specify category of rape (s130(2) Penal Code); trial court may not amend charge at judgment stage (s234 CPA); defects incurable under s388 CPA; revisional powers under s4(2) AJA; retrial not ordered where charge is non-existent or incurably defective.
|
16 May 2018 |
|
A charge sheet citing a non‑existent provision rendered the appellant's trial unfair, so conviction and sentence were quashed.
Criminal practice — Charge sheet requirements — Statement of offence must cite correct creating provision — Particulars must disclose category and essential ingredients of rape; incurable defects render trial a nullity; improper amendment at judgment irregular; revisional powers and retrial considerations.
|
16 May 2018 |
|
|
15 May 2018 |
|
Failure to cite s.361(2) rendered the High Court's extension proceedings a nullity and they were quashed.
* Criminal procedure — extension of time to lodge notice of appeal — section 361(2) Criminal Procedure Act is the enabling provision — specific subsection must be cited when moving the High Court. * Failure to cite enabling subsection renders proceedings incompetent/nullity. * Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.4(2) — revisionary/quashing power where jurisdictional defect exists.
|
15 May 2018 |
|
Defective charge failing to cite the enactment rendered the trial a nullity; conviction quashed and no retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure – Charge particulars – Statement of offence must identify enactment creating offence (CPA ss.132,135) – Defective charge renders trial a nullity – Revision powers (AJA s.4(2)) – Retrial discretionary; interests of justice and prolonged unlawful detention may preclude retrial (Fatehali Manji). Penal consequences – sentencing of youthful first offender (Penal Code s.131(2)(a)).
|
15 May 2018 |
|
Failure to enter conviction and an incurably defective robbery charge (no victim named) rendered proceedings a nullity and justified release.
Criminal procedure – failure to enter conviction under ss.235 & 312 CPA – judgment nullity; Charge formulation – robbery charge must specify person against whom violence was directed (Second Schedule specimen) – omission fatal; Appeal incompetent where based on invalid trial judgment; Revisional powers under s.4(2) AJA – quashing proceedings and setting aside sentence; Retrial declined where defendant has served substantial sentence.
|
15 May 2018 |
|
An application for extension to file a notice of appeal must be brought under s.11(1) AJA; proceedings under the wrong provision were nullified.
* Criminal procedure – extension of time to file notice of appeal – application in High Court must be made under section 11(1) Appellate Jurisdiction Act, not Rule 47 of the Court of Appeal Rules. * Civil/criminal appeals – competence of application – incompetent proceedings should be struck out. * Appellate jurisdiction – revisional powers under section 4(2) AJA may be invoked to nullify proceedings founded on inapplicable provisions. * Preliminary objections – cannot be entertained where there is no competent appeal before the court.
|
15 May 2018 |
|
|
14 May 2018 |
|
|
14 May 2018 |
|
Failure by the applicant to serve the notice of appeal under Rule 84(1) renders the appeal incompetent and it is struck out.
Civil procedure – appeal competence – mandatory service of notice of appeal under Rule 84(1) Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 – failure to serve notice is failure to take an essential step and renders appeal incompetent.
|
11 May 2018 |
|
|
11 May 2018 |
|
Failure to enter conviction and an incurably defective robbery charge rendered proceedings null; appellant ordered released.
Criminal procedure – Failure to enter conviction under s.235 and s.312(2) CPA renders judgment a nullity; defective charge – robbery charge must name the person against whom violence was directed (Second Schedule specimen); incurable procedural irregularity; appellate revisional powers under s.4(2) AJA; retrial not ordered where appellant has served substantial sentence and interest of justice requires release.
|
11 May 2018 |
|
A post-plea transfer under s.256A CPA invalidates the subordinate court trial and the case is remitted to the High Court.
* Criminal procedure – section 256A CPA – transfer of trial to resident magistrate with extended jurisdiction must be made before taking of plea and preliminary hearing; post-plea transfer invalid – proceedings nullity; revisional powers under s.4(2) AJA; remittal to High Court.
|
10 May 2018 |
|
Transfer of a murder trial after plea and preliminary hearing is unlawful; proceedings nullified and remitted to the High Court.
* Criminal procedure – Transfer under s.256A Criminal Procedure Act – Transfer to resident magistrate with extended jurisdiction must be directed before plea and preliminary hearing; transfer after plea/preliminary hearing is invalid and renders subsequent proceedings a nullity. * Appellate Jurisdiction – Exercise of revisional powers under s.4(2) AJA to quash irregular subordinate court proceedings and set aside sentence. * Jurisdiction – Proper forum for trial of murder committed for trial to High Court unless valid transfer effected in accordance with s.256A.
|
10 May 2018 |
|
Failure to record reasons for reassignment of a partly-heard trial vitiates successor magistrate’s jurisdiction; retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure—section 214(1) Criminal Procedure Act—reassignment of partly-heard trial—reasons for transfer must be recorded; failure to do so vitiates jurisdiction of successor magistrate and renders proceedings nullity—Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.4(2)—revisional power to quash and order retrial.
|
10 May 2018 |
|
A wrong statutory citation in a committal order is curable where the committing court had jurisdiction; record remitted to High Court.
Criminal procedure – committal to High Court – wrong statutory citation (s.243(1) v. s.246(1) CPA) – harmless/curable error under s.388 CPA; distinction from absence of committal (R v Asafu Tumwine); reading statements under wrong provision (s.247 v. s.246(2)) – curable; remedial option – remit record rather than exercise revision.
|
10 May 2018 |
|
Successor magistrate's takeover without recorded reasons vitiates proceedings; retrial ordered and sentence set aside.
Criminal procedure – Partly heard trials – Successor magistrate taking over without recording reasons – s.214(1) Criminal Procedure Act – Lack of jurisdiction renders proceedings a nullity; revisional powers under s.4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act to quash and order retrial.
|
9 May 2018 |
|
A transfer to a magistrate with extended jurisdiction after plea and preliminary hearing is unlawful.
Criminal procedure — s.256A CPA — transfer to resident magistrate with extended jurisdiction must occur before plea and preliminary hearing; transfer after those stages is unlawful and renders subordinate court proceedings a nullity — revisional powers under s.4(2) AJA — quashing proceedings and remitting to High Court.
|
8 May 2018 |