|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| June 2004 |
|
|
A court cannot sua sponte find "good cause" to admit a time‑barred DPP appeal; the respondent must apply and justify delay.
Criminal procedure – s.379(b)(ii) Criminal Procedure Act – "good cause" to admit out‑of‑time appeals – scope of phrase – courts cannot act suo motu to invent applications and admit time‑barred appeals – grounds of intended appeal may amount to good cause but must be advanced by applicant.
|
10 June 2004 |
|
Reported
Criminal Practice and Procedure - Appeals - Appeal by the Director of Public Prosecutions — Appeal to the High Court filed out of the prescribed limitation period—Discretion of the High Court to admit such appeal- Whether the High Court can invoke its discretion suo motu - Section 379(b)(Ui) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1985. |
10 June 2004 |
|
An improperly recorded cautioned statement and other procedural defects rendered the murder conviction unsafe; appeal allowed.
Criminal procedure — admissibility of cautioned statement — mandatory compliance with ss 53, 54 and 57 Criminal Procedure Act; voluntariness and requirement to determine whether accused made statement; confession and need for corroboration under Evidence Act; sufficiency of evidence absent repudiated caution statement; preliminary hearing — s.192(3) memorandum must be read and explained to accused.
|
10 June 2004 |
|
Appellant's murder conviction quashed where visual and voice identification, dying declaration and accomplice evidence were unreliable.
* Criminal law – Identification evidence – visual identification at night from brief, poorly lit observation unreliable. * Criminal law – Voice identification – familiarity from casual public shouting inadequate for reliable identification at a violent crime. * Criminal law – Dying declaration – cannot sustain conviction where primary identification evidence is discredited. * Evidence – credibility of witness living with accused and failing to report admissions; corroboration required. * Criminal procedure – section 220(1) mental examination where doubts as to accused’s sanity arise.
|
10 June 2004 |
|
Appeal allowed: unreliable key witness and insufficient circumstantial evidence; conviction and death sentence quashed.
Criminal law – Murder – Circumstantial evidence – Credibility of witnesses – Alibi and failure to call corroborative witnesses – Conviction must rest on strength of prosecution, not defence omissions.
|
10 June 2004 |
|
A repudiated confession, if proven voluntary and materially corroborated, can sustain a murder conviction under common intention.
* Criminal law – Confession – cautioned statement – voluntariness and admissibility; burden on prosecution under s.27(2) Law of Evidence Act.
* Repudiated/retracted confession – need for corroboration and what constitutes material corroboration.
* Criminal law – common intention – liability where accused participated in plan though may not have struck fatal blow.
* Criminal procedure – trial-within-a-trial – proofs of torture/beatings; misdirection by trial court and appellate review.
* Prosecution’s duty – not obliged to call every witness; failure to call a person not fatal absent known favourable evidence.
|
10 June 2004 |
|
Appellant's genuine belief of attack justified self‑defence but excessive force reduced offence from murder to manslaughter.
* Criminal law – Homicide – Distinction between murder and manslaughter – adequacy of evidence to prove intent for murder. * Criminal law – Self‑defence and mistake of fact – where accused may honestly but unreasonably believe in need to repel an attack. * Evidentiary issues – uncertainty about weapon, absence of key witness (wife), and effect on proof beyond reasonable doubt. * Sentence – substitution of conviction and mitigation by time spent in custody.
|
10 June 2004 |
|
Appellate court affirmed murder conviction, finding child eyewitness credible and contradictions immaterial; intoxication unsupported.
Criminal law – credibility of child witness; contradictions in evidence – immaterial inconsistencies; alibi assessment; intoxication and specific intent; murder vs manslaughter.
|
10 June 2004 |
|
Voluntary extra-judicial confessions, corroborated by recovered items, upheld to sustain murder convictions.
Criminal law – Murder – Extra-judicial confessions – Admissibility and sufficiency – Corroboration by circumstantial evidence – Common intention – s.23 Penal Code.
|
10 June 2004 |
|
Voluntary extra‑judicial confessions, corroborated by possession of stolen goods, sustain murder convictions under common intention.
* Criminal law – extra‑judicial/confessional statements – admissibility and weight – voluntary confessions may support conviction alone.
* Corroboration – possession of stolen property matching confessions can corroborate retracted statements.
* Criminal law – common intention (s.23 Penal Code) – joint participation in burglary leading to death sustains murder conviction.
* Procedure – death of an appellant during appeal leads to abatement of that appellant’s appeal.
|
10 June 2004 |
|
Failure to hold a trial within a trial for a retracted, non-understood cautioned statement led to quashing of the murder conviction.
Criminal procedure – cautioned statement/confession – retraction/repudiation – duty to hold trial within a trial to determine voluntariness and correctness; language/translator issues; inadmissibility of improperly admitted confession; insufficient corroboration – conviction quashed.
|
10 June 2004 |
|
Omission of the High Court decree/order from the record of appeal renders the appeal incompetent and is struck out with costs.
* Civil procedure – Appeal records – mandatory inclusion of decree or drawn order in record of appeal under Rule 89(1)(h) and (2)(v) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
* Procedural compliance – failure to extract decree/order renders appeal incompetent and justifies striking out.
* Remedies – supplementary record or amendment cannot cure fundamental omission; fresh appeal may be instituted after proper extraction.
|
2 June 2004 |
|
Revision applications on Primary Court matters require full records and cannot bypass appeal certificate requirements.
* Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.4(3) – revision – Court of Appeal may call for and examine High Court records; applicant moving Court must supply records. * Magistrates’ Courts Act & Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.5(2)(c) – appeals from Primary Courts require High Court certificate on point of law; revision cannot circumvent certificate requirement. * Civil Procedure Code s.78 – review does not apply to Primary Courts; High Court cannot review Primary Court matters under the CPA. * Procedure – judge must give reasons for summary rejection of appeal; omission is a ground of appeal. * Civil procedure – abuse of process – striking out for failure to comply and for circumventing statutory appeal route.
|
2 June 2004 |
|
A Notice of Appeal lodged with the Court of Appeal deputy registrar and unsigned was fatally defective, so the appeal was struck out.
Civil procedure — Notice of appeal — Rule 76(1): must be sent to Registrar of the High Court — lodging with Deputy Registrar of Court of Appeal is improper; Rule 2: definition of Registrar of High Court does not include Court of Appeal deputy registrar; Form D: signature mandatory — unsigned notice invalid; preliminary objection — fatal defects justify striking out appeal.
|
2 June 2004 |
|
Appellant’s murder conviction quashed because visual and voice identification under poor conditions was unsafe.
* Criminal law – Identification evidence – Visual and voice identification – Reliability where torchlight blinded witness and moonlight was dim; caution required for single-witness identification (Waziri Amani; Abdulla Wendo). * Criminal procedure – Conviction based on identification – need for corroborative or circumstantial evidence when conditions unfavourable.
|
2 June 2004 |
|
Reported
A suit against a district executive director fails if the statutory council did not exist when the events occurred.
Local government — Establishment of district councils — Government Notice as operative date for existence; conclusive certificate from Clerk to National Assembly — Capacity to sue or be sued; Cause of action — Suit against a statutory office-holder where the creating authority did not exist at material time; Pleadings — Verification of plaint unnecessary to decide once lack of legal personality established.
|
2 June 2004 |
|
Reported
Local Government - Establishment of local government authorities - Whether establishment of district council and appointment of district executive director may be clandestine or merely implied - Law and procedure of establishing district council and appointment of executive director - Sections 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the Local Government (District Authorities) Act 1982, and section 5 of the Public Service Act 2002.
Local Government — Suits against local government authorities - Whether a district council or its executive director may be sued upon transactions that occurred before the district council came into existence. |
2 June 2004 |
| May 2004 |
|
|
An unreliable accomplice's inconsistent testimony cannot safely support a conviction for receiving stolen property.
* Criminal law – Receiving stolen property – Conviction based on accomplice’s evidence – requirement of credibility and corroboration.
* Evidence – Hostile witness – proper procedure for treating witness as hostile (production of prior statement, formal application, hearing objections, court ruling).
* Evidence – Accomplice testimony – unreliability and effect on safety of conviction.
* Remedies – Quashing conviction and orders for return of property where conviction unsafe.
|
21 May 2004 |
|
Where the prosecution’s principal witness was unreliable, the respondent’s conviction was unsafe and was quashed.
Criminal law — conviction based on testimony of co-accused — reliability and corroboration; procedure for declaring a witness hostile — requirements and safeguards; appellate review where principal witness discredited — conviction unsafe; restitution/compensation orders in criminal appeal.
|
21 May 2004 |
|
A dying declaration and inconsistent eyewitness testimony were insufficient to uphold the appellant's murder conviction.
Criminal law – Murder – Reliance on eyewitness testimony and dying declaration – Material contradictions in witness evidence – Quality and circumstances of dying declaration – Alibi and burden on prosecution to disprove it – Conviction unsafe where key evidence unreliable.
|
21 May 2004 |
|
Reported
Killing reduced to manslaughter for provocation after trial judge failed adequately to direct assessors.
Criminal law – Provocation (section 202 Penal Code) – meaning and ordinary person test – duty to direct assessors – misdirection – effect of weapon/force on inference of malice aforethought – reduction of murder to manslaughter.
|
3 May 2004 |
|
Reported
Criminal Law - Murder-Defence of provocation -Killing occurring in a quarrel following rude and abusive utterances by the deceased - Whether the accused may be convicted of murder — Section 202 of the Penal Code Chapter 16.
Criminal Practice and Procedure - Conviction - Conviction for Murder - Appellant killed the deceased in reaction to rude utterances by the deceased - Whether the court may convict of murder without requiring the assessors to make a finding whether the words uttered were provocative. |
2 May 2004 |
| January 2004 |
|
|
Court quashed abusive‑language conviction where evidence failed to show likelihood of breach of the peace and sentence was unlawful.
* Criminal law – Appeal – Summary dismissal under section 364(1) Criminal Procedure Act – powers to be exercised sparingly – necessity to read record and memorandum of appeal. * Evidence – Abusive language (s.89(1)(a) Penal Code) – requirement that words be likely to cause breach of the peace – need for testimony of listeners or other proof of likely breach. * Sentence – unlawfulness/excessiveness where sentence exceeds statutory maximum. * Appellate Jurisdiction – exercise of revisional jurisdiction (s.4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act) to correct miscarriage of justice.
|
1 January 2004 |