|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2019 |
|
|
Extension of time granted where leave to appeal was pending and alleged illegality constituted good cause.
* Civil procedure – Extension of time under Rule 10 – factors: length of delay, reasons for delay, prejudice. * Extension while leave to appeal pending – permissible and prudent. * Illegality in impugned decision – constitutes good cause for enlargement of time. * Prospects of success – not generally assessable at extension stage.
|
6 December 2019 |
| November 2019 |
|
|
Failure to read charge, unsworn witnesses and deficient judgment vitiated conviction; appeal allowed and appellant released.
Criminal procedure — s.228(1) CPA: mandatory duty to state substance of charge and ask accused to admit or deny; Evidence — s.198(1) CPA: witnesses must be sworn or affirmed; Judgment requirements — s.312(1) CPA: judgment must state points for determination, decision and reasons; Appellate revision — s.4(2) AJA: quashing proceedings for fundamental procedural irregularities; Relief — discretion to order release instead of retrial where justice so requires.
|
8 November 2019 |
|
Procedural irregularities in assessor selection and summing up vitiated trial; retrial ordered.
* Criminal procedure – Assessors – Obligation to inform accused of right to object to assessors – Established practice to ensure fair trial (s.265 CPA).
* Summing up – Improper introduction of extraneous material and judicial comment – Misdirection of assessors.
* Circumstantial evidence – Necessity to direct assessors on the law of circumstantial evidence and the 'last person seen' principle when conviction rests on such evidence.
* Appellate jurisdiction – Exercise of revisionary powers (s.4(2) AJA) to nullify proceedings and order retrial.
|
8 November 2019 |
|
Second appeal dismissed: victim’s competent testimony and slight penetration sufficiently proved rape.
Criminal law – Rape – Evidence of child/victim of sexual offence under section 127(7) Evidence Act may suffice alone; penetration however slight under section 130(4)(a) Penal Code is sufficient; new grounds of fact on second appeal not entertainable; position of authority (driver) relevant under s.130(3)(a).
|
8 November 2019 |
|
Failure to read the charge and take a plea renders the trial a nullity; armed robbery carries a mandatory 30-year sentence.
Criminal procedure — Arraignment — Reading of charge and taking plea — Amendment/substitution of charge — s228 & s234 Criminal Procedure Act — Failure to take plea renders trial nullity; sentence legality — mandatory minimum for armed robbery; exercise of s4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act powers.
|
8 November 2019 |
|
Failure to arraign, allow objections to assessors and to sum up on circumstantial evidence vitiated the murder trial; retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure – assessors: accused must be given opportunity to object to selected assessors; failure is fatal; arraignment – plea must be taken before trial; failure renders trial a nullity; circumstantial evidence – court must adequately sum up to assessors; assessors’ opinions must be recorded after summing up; sentencing for multiple murder convictions – sentence to be imposed on one count only.
|
8 November 2019 |
|
Failure to take plea, allow objections to assessors and inaccurate summing-up vitiated the trial; conviction quashed and retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure — trial with assessors — duty to afford accused opportunity to object to assessors; Plea-taking in High Court — information to be read/explained and plea recorded (ss.275, 283 CPA); Summing-up — must accurately reflect evidence, extraneous facts vitiate assessors’ opinions; Overriding objective (ss.3A, 3B AJA) cannot cure fundamental procedural defects; Revision jurisdiction (s.4(2) AJA) — quash proceedings and order retrial.
|
7 November 2019 |
|
Age may be proved other than by birth certificate; prior acquaintance and early identification rendered the victim’s identification reliable.
* Criminal law – sexual offences – rape of a child – proof of age: age may be proved by PF3 and oral evidence; failure to object/cross-examine amounts to acceptance.
* Evidence – identification: prior acquaintance and early identification are strong indicators of reliability; demeanour findings of trial court entitled to deference.
* Identification parades – unnecessary where the complainant knows the accused.
* Appeal procedure – second appeal: Court of Appeal will not entertain grounds not raised and decided in the High Court.
|
6 November 2019 |
|
Conviction quashed where complainant's material contradictions undermined prosecution's proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Rape: sufficiency of evidence; material contradictions in complainant's testimony undermining prosecution case; second appeal: reassessment of credibility where contradictions affect gist; appellate jurisdiction: refusal to entertain new grounds not raised earlier.
|
6 November 2019 |
|
Second appeal dismissed: new grounds expunged; minor witness discrepancies and relatives’ testimony did not defeat corroborated medical evidence.
* Criminal law – Appeal procedure – Court of Appeal will not entertain grounds not raised and decided on first appeal.
* Evidence – Witness contradictions – Minor inconsistencies do not necessarily go to the root of the prosecution case.
* Evidence – Near relatives – Relationship to victim does not bar testimony; credibility and weight are determinative.
* Evidence – Medical evidence (PF3) – Corroborative medical findings can support conviction for sexual offences.
|
5 November 2019 |
|
A credible child’s unsworn testimony can sustain a rape conviction; DNA or investigator testimony not always required.
Criminal law – Sexual offences – Child witness evidence under section 127(2) and (7) Evidence Act – Unsworn testimony and corroboration; Identification – sufficiency of victim’s identification; Medical evidence – PF3 by Clinical Medical Officer; DNA not essential; Penetration however slight (section 130(4)(a)); No prescribed number of witnesses (section 143).
|
4 November 2019 |
|
An unequivocal guilty plea to attempted rape supports conviction; mandatory 30-year sentence against the applicant upheld.
* Criminal law – Attempted rape – Guilty plea – Requirement that plea be unequivocal and that accused understands charge and ingredients – cautioned statement and torn undergarment admissible and corroborative.
* Criminal procedure – Plea of guilty – Appealability limited to legality or extent of sentence; grounds not raised below not entertained by appellate court.
* Sentencing – Mandatory 30-year sentence for attempted rape under section 132(1)/(2) Penal Code upheld; judicial concern expressed about proportionality and call for legislative review.
|
4 November 2019 |
|
Appellant's objections to cautioned statement and language barrier rejected; conviction for rape upheld.
* Criminal law – Rape – Victim's testimony as best evidence in sexual offences; corroboration by medical and confessional statements.
* Evidence – Admissibility of cautioned statements – presumption of voluntariness where no contemporaneous objection is raised.
* Fair trial – Language barrier claim must be raised at trial; afterthoughts are not entertained on appeal.
* Appeal – Failure to object at trial limits ability to challenge admissibility of statements on appeal.
|
4 November 2019 |
|
Court upheld a murder conviction based on circumstantial evidence, recent possession and admissible confessions despite no postmortem.
* Criminal law – Murder – Circumstantial evidence – Last seen with deceased and recent possession doctrine – sufficiency to infer guilt.
* Evidence – Admissibility of cautioned and extra-judicial statements – mini-trials and corroboration by oral confessions.
* Evidence – Postmortem reports not invariably required where other evidence establishes death and culpability.
* Defence – Alibi – rejection where testimony is contradictory and not credible.
* Procedure – New grounds of appeal not raised in trial court cannot be entertained on appeal.
|
3 November 2019 |
|
Statutory warehouse receipts establish delivery; unpleaded forgery allegations require strict proof and adverse inference may follow.
Warehouse receipts – evidential value and proprietary rights under the Warehouse Receipts Act; proof of delivery by warehouse receipts; allegations of forgery/fraud in civil proceedings must be specifically pleaded and proved to a higher standard; adverse inference for failure to call key witness.
|
1 November 2019 |
|
Warehouse receipts complying with statute proved delivery; unpleaded, unproved forgery allegations were rejected and appeal dismissed.
* Evidence – warehouse receipts – compliance with Warehouse Receipts Act – admissibility and effect as proof of delivery and proprietary rights.
* Evidence – fraud/forgery – must be specifically pleaded and proved to a higher standard than ordinary civil claims.
* Evidence – burden of proof – he who alleges fraud must prove it; failure to call material witness permits adverse inference.
* Civil procedure – appellate review – evaluation of evidence and drawing adverse inference for non-production of witness.
|
1 November 2019 |
|
Statutory warehouse receipts proved delivery; unpleaded forgery allegations unproven, appeal dismissed with costs.
* Evidence – Documentary proof – Warehouse receipts held to be valid statutory proof of proprietary rights and delivery under the Warehouse Receipts Act; * Evidence – Allegations of fraud/forgery must be specifically pleaded and proved to a higher standard than ordinary civil claims; * Evidence – Adverse inference may be drawn where a party fails to call a relevant witness; * Civil procedure – burden of proof and evaluation of contradictory documentary and oral evidence.
|
1 November 2019 |
|
Defective summing up to assessors on recent possession and circumstantial evidence rendered trial proceedings a nullity; matter remitted for proper summing up.
Criminal procedure – obligation to sum up to assessors – assessors must be addressed on vital points of law; Circumstantial evidence – doctrine of recent possession; Non-direction to assessors renders proceedings a nullity; Remittal for proper summing up and fresh judgment under revisional powers (s.4(2) AJA).
|
1 November 2019 |
| October 2019 |
|
|
Murder conviction and death sentence upheld on circumstantial evidence and recent possession despite no postmortem report.
Criminal law – Murder – Circumstantial evidence and doctrine of recent possession; admissibility and weight of cautioned and extra-judicial statements; oral confession to civilians; postmortem report not always mandatory to prove cause of death; alibi contradicted and rejected; new grounds on appeal not entertained.
|
29 October 2019 |
|
A conviction may rest on unsworn testimony of a child if voir dire shows the child understands and speaks the truth; minor inconsistencies are not fatal.
* Evidence – Sexual offences – Unsworn testimony of child of tender years – section 127(7) (now s.127(6)) of the Evidence Act – requirement for voir dire under s.127(2) to assess understanding of duty to tell the truth – conviction without corroboration permissible where court records satisfaction that child tells the truth. * Evidence – Witness inconsistencies – Minor discrepancies not fatal if they do not go to root of case.
|
29 October 2019 |
|
Review application dismissed for failing to show a manifest error; name of applicant rectified.
Criminal law — Review of Court of Appeal decision under Rule 66(1)(a) — Review limited to manifest, obvious errors on the face of the record — Review not a substitute for appeal — Identification parade admissibility and contradictory witness evidence cannot be re-evaluated in review — Rectification of party’s name under Rule 42.
|
29 October 2019 |
|
Manufacturer's duty exists, but claimant failed to prove breach, causation or damages due to insufficient evidence.
* Tort — Negligence — Manufacturer's duty of care to consumers (Donoghue v Stevenson). * Proof and causation — requirement to identify the consumed product, laboratory testing, and medical evidence. * Evidentiary insufficiency — unopened/untested exhibit and absence of witness testimony defeating liability.
|
29 October 2019 |
|
Manufacturer owed duty but appellant failed to prove breach, causation or damages; appeal dismissed.
Manufacturer's duty of care; negligence—requirement to prove duty, breach, causation and damages; evidentiary requirements—consumed exhibit, laboratory/TFDA analysis, medical evidence and relevant witnesses; distinction from Donoghue v Stevenson (opaque/consumed contaminated product).
|
29 October 2019 |
|
Manufacturer owes duty of care, but appellant failed to prove breach, causation or damages; appeal dismissed and costs awarded.
Tort — Negligence — Duty of care of manufacturer to consumers; Causation and proof on balance of probabilities; Evidentiary requirements — identity of consumed product, laboratory/TFDA testing and medical evidence; Distinguishing Donoghue v Stevenson on facts.
|
29 October 2019 |
| August 2019 |
|
|
Assessors’ partisan cross‑examination and the judge’s unexplained divergence from assessors’ opinion vitiated the trial; retrial ordered.
* Criminal procedure – Role of assessors – Assessors must aid the judge impartially and must not cross‑examine witnesses as adversaries; such conduct vitiates trial.
* Evidence – Order of examination – Examination‑in‑chief, cross‑examination and re‑examination sequence must be observed; assessors’ questions are properly asked under s.177 (preferably after re‑examination).
* Trial irregularity – Failure of judge to give reasons when departing from assessors’ unanimous opinion is a miscarriage of justice.
* Remedy – Quash proceedings and order retrial where irregularities are incurable.
|
30 August 2019 |
|
Assessors' partisan cross‑examination and unexplained judicial departure vitiated the trial; retrial ordered.
* Criminal procedure – Role of assessors – Assessors sit to aid the judge and must remain impartial; they may question witnesses under s.177 Evidence Act but should not cross‑examine as an adverse party. * Evidence – Order of examination – Sections 146 and 147 Evidence Act prescribe examination‑in‑chief, cross‑examination, then re‑examination; assessors' intervention should not disrupt this order. * Judicial duty – Where a judge departs from assessors' unanimous opinion, reasons should be given; failure to do so may amount to miscarriage of justice. * Remedy – Incurable irregularities (assessors acting as adverse party; failure to give reasons) vitiate trial; retrial ordered.
|
30 August 2019 |
|
Hot pursuit and daylight identification upheld; improperly obtained exhibits expunged but convictions for armed robbery affirmed.
* Criminal law – Armed robbery – Elements: use/threat of violence and stealing; threat by machete sufficient even if weapon not tendered. * Identification – Hot pursuit and daylight observation dispensed with need for identification parade. * Evidence – Search and seizure – non-compliance with section 38(1) CPA, absence of independent witness and receipt; improperly obtained exhibits expunged. * Procedure – Defective citation in charge sheet not fatal where accused understood charge and were able to defend.
|
30 August 2019 |
|
Hot pursuit and eyewitnesses established armed robbery despite expunging improperly seized exhibits.
Criminal law – Armed robbery under section 287A Penal Code – identification by victims during daylight and hot pursuit; evidentiary procedure – searches and seizures – non‑compliance with section 38(1) CPA, need for independent witness and receipt; emergency search under section 42 CPA; admissibility and expunging of exhibits; charge sheet citation and prejudice.
|
30 August 2019 |
|
Reported
Conviction for trafficking upheld: emergency search, possession, chain of custody and cautioned statement found lawful.
Criminal law – narcotic trafficking; possession and identification of exhibits; search and seizure – emergency search under section 42 CPA; certificate of seizure admissibility; chain of custody – paper trail requirement may be relaxed for exhibits not easily tampered with; cautioned statement – computation of four‑hour interviewing period excluding conveyance time under section 50(2)(a) CPA.
|
30 August 2019 |
|
Vehicle owner held in constructive possession of seized rhino horns; three passengers acquitted for lack of proof of knowledge.
Criminal law — possession and knowledge — constructive possession by vehicle owner; Evidentiary chain of custody — continuity of custody for wildlife trophies; Expert identification of wildlife trophies — admissibility and weight; Insufficient proof — presence or suspicious conduct alone does not establish possession.
|
30 August 2019 |
|
|
29 August 2019 |
|
Magistrate's refusal to allow an extra prosecution witness and closure of the prosecution case vitiated the trial.
* Criminal procedure – Prosecution's prerogative to close its case – Trial magistrate has no power to close prosecution case.
* Fair hearing – Article 13(6)(a) – Refusal to allow additional prosecution witness and court closure vitiates trial.
* Revisional jurisdiction – s.4(2) AJA used to quash proceedings, conviction and sentence and remit for continuation.
* Applicability of ss.229(1) and 230 Criminal Procedure Act.
|
29 August 2019 |
|
Appellate court quashes convictions where robbery particulars were defective and cautioned statements and identification evidence were irregular.
Criminal law — defective particulars of robbery — requirement to specify person threatened; admissibility of cautioned statements — four-hour rule, correct statutory provision, and reading out in court; identification evidence — parade and conditions of ID; requirement of search and seizure certificate for recovered exhibits; effect of Act No.2/2010 on DPP fiat for arms offences; appellate competence to consider only grounds raised in lower courts.
|
29 August 2019 |
|
Victim's credible identification, corroborated by medical evidence and proper voir dire, upheld rape conviction and mandatory life sentence.
* Criminal law – Rape of a girl under ten years – Identification – Familiarity between victim and accused and failure to challenge identification by cross‑examination. * Evidence – Child witness – Voir dire and admissibility of unsworn evidence; requirement to assess credibility and need for corroboration. * Medical evidence – PF.3 and clinician’s testimony corroborating penetration. * Appellate review – Concurrent findings of fact will not be disturbed unless perverse or demonstrably wrong. * Sentencing – Mandatory life sentence for rape of child under ten years.
|
29 August 2019 |
|
Failure to allow the accused to admit or dispute each fact made the plea equivocal and the conviction unsafe.
Criminal procedure – Plea of guilty – Requirement to explain ingredients and ask accused to admit/deny each constituent – Statement of facts must be met by accused's opportunity to dispute or explain – Equivocal plea renders conviction unsafe – Quash and remit for retrial.
|
29 August 2019 |
|
Appellant's guilty plea was equivocal because he was not asked to admit or deny each constituent fact; retrial ordered.
* Criminal procedure – Plea-taking – Requirement under section 228 CPA that accused be asked to admit or deny the substance/constituent facts of the charge before conviction on plea of guilty.
* Equivocal plea – Where facts are read and the record shows 'All facts have not been disputed' without the accused being asked to respond, the plea is equivocal and conviction unsafe.
* Remedy – Quashing of conviction and sentence and remittal for retrial with a fresh plea.
|
29 August 2019 |
|
An equivocal guilty plea, where the accused is not asked to admit or deny each fact, vitiates conviction and requires retrial.
Criminal procedure – Plea of guilty – Requirement to explain each constituent element and to ask accused to admit or deny each fact – Equivocal plea where accused not given chance to dispute or explain facts – Section 228 Criminal Procedure Act – Retrial ordered.
|
29 August 2019 |
|
Reported
High Court suo motu compensation order quashed for violating the appellant's right to be heard; other grounds struck out.
Appellate procedure – appeal from Primary Court – certification of point of law under s.5(2)(c) AJA; natural justice – right to be heard – court cannot make suo motu compensation order without hearing parties; locus standi – complaints affecting non‑parties require appropriate parties and evidence; factual issues are not points of law.
|
28 August 2019 |
|
|
28 August 2019 |
|
Unreliable identification and improperly admitted confessions vitiated conviction; appeal allowed and appellants acquitted.
* Criminal law – visual identification – Waziri Amani safeguards – dock identification without parade unreliable. * Evidence – cautioned statements – objection alleging torture requires immediate inquiry into voluntariness; failure renders statements inadmissible. * Evidence – extrajudicial statements – inadmissible if read before admissibility ascertained or if unconnected to charged offence. * Criminal Procedure Act s.240(3) – medical reports require compliance and opportunity for cross‑examination. * Criminal procedure – duty to evaluate accused’s defence (alibi); failure is serious error.
|
28 August 2019 |
|
Court quashed murder convictions because night identifications were unsafe and alibi defences were improperly disregarded.
Criminal law — Identification evidence at night — necessity for description, source and intensity of light, observation distance and prompt naming; Alibi — notice and particulars under section 194 CPA, allocation of burden and judicial duty to consider alibi; Witness credibility — effect of delays in recording statements and inconsistencies with investigative sketch map; Safety of conviction where identification and alibi treatment are defective.
|
28 August 2019 |
|
Assessors' improper cross-examination and doubtful identification made convictions unsafe; appeal allowed and appellants released.
Criminal procedure — role of assessors — assessors must not cross-examine witnesses; Summing-up — judge must not express personal views or unduly influence assessors; Identification — caution required for visual or voice ID at night, in crowds or with inadequate light; Alibi — trial judge must direct assessors on the law of alibi and not shift burden; Retrial — not ordered where prosecution evidence is materially discrepant.
|
27 August 2019 |
|
Assessors’ improper cross‑examination and judge’s influence, plus unreliable identification, vitiated convictions; appeal allowed and appellants released.
* Criminal procedure – assessors’ role – assessors not entitled to cross‑examine witnesses; such conduct vitiates trial. * Criminal procedure – summing up – trial judge must not express own factual views or unduly influence assessors and must direct on legal defences (eg, alibi). * Evidence – visual/voice identification – identification at night, in charged crowds and without clear description of lighting is unsafe. * Remedy – where trial irregularities combine with materially discrepant prosecution evidence a retrial may be inappropriate; release ordered.
|
27 August 2019 |
|
Court expunged an improperly admitted confession, found defective summing-up and unsafe identification, quashing convictions and ordering release.
* Criminal procedure – assessors – duty of trial judge to sum up adequately on all vital points of law and facts; summing up which misdirects assessors renders trial a nullity.
* Evidence – confessional/cautioned statement – onus to prove voluntariness rests on prosecution; assessors must be retired during mini-trial; failure to comply renders confession inadmissible.
* Evidence – visual identification – conditions at scene, duration of observation, inconsistencies and unexplained delays in arrest affect reliability; identification must be watertight to ground conviction.
* Retrial – principles limiting retrial where original evidence is insufficient and retrial would unfairly advantage prosecution.
|
27 August 2019 |
|
The appellants' murder convictions were quashed for procedural irregularities and insufficient admissible circumstantial evidence.
Criminal procedure — assessors — improper summing up and influence on assessors; Evidence — section 34B Evidence Act — statutory conditions for tendering written statements not complied with; Evidence — section 198 CPA — testimony must be on oath or affirmation; Criminal procedure — section 293/230 CPA — finding of no case to answer and procedure before calling accused to defend; Circumstantial evidence — suspicion insufficient to ground conviction; Retrial — not ordered where remaining admissible evidence is insufficient.
|
27 August 2019 |
|
Convictions quashed where identification evidence was unreliable and the trial court wrongly dismissed properly notified alibis.
Criminal law — Identification evidence — Night-time sightings, source and intensity of light, distance and prior acquaintance; Defence of alibi — statutory notice, evidential weight and burden to disprove; Conviction unsafe where identification and alibi improperly handled.
|
27 August 2019 |
|
The applicant’s rape conviction upheld; victim’s uncorroborated descriptive testimony and medical evidence sufficed.
Sexual offences — Evidence of child of tender years — Corroboration not mandatory under s.127(7) Evidence Act; victim's uncorroborated but credible testimony may suffice. Medical evidence — PF3 may confirm penetration though absence of bruises is explicable by delay. Corroborative circumstances — descriptive account of accused's room as corroboration. Second appeal — concurrent findings of fact should not be disturbed absent misdirection or miscarriage of justice.
|
27 August 2019 |
|
Child's unsworn testimony corroborated by eyewitness and medical evidence upheld conviction; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – Unnatural offence against a child; identification evidence; child witness — voire dire and unsworn testimony; medical evidence (PF.3) corroboration; cautioned statement improperly admitted under s.34B(1) Evidence Act; appellate re-evaluation of evidence.
|
27 August 2019 |
|
Appellant's challenge to conviction for unnatural offence against a five‑year‑old dismissed; identification and evidence upheld.
Criminal law – Unnatural offence against a child; identification in daylight; child witness voir dire and unsworn evidence requiring corroboration; distinction between direct medical evidence and hearsay; inadmissibility and expunging of wrongly tendered cautioned statement; appellate re‑evaluation of concurrent findings.
|
27 August 2019 |
|
Appeal allowed: improper assessor conduct and unsafe identification quashed convictions; appellants ordered released.
Criminal procedure — Assessors — Improper cross-examination by assessors contrary to Evidence Act and their role under CPA s.265; Trial judge’s summing up — improper influence and failure to direct on alibi; Identification — need for clear description of lighting and cautions when identification is from a large, noisy crowd; Retrial — not appropriate where prosecution evidence is discrepant and unsafe.
|
26 August 2019 |