|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| November 2008 |
|
|
Procedural mis‑labeling does not invalidate a valid transfer; the respondent failed to prove the applicant’s vessel caused the collision.
* Civil procedure – transfer of appeals – effectiveness of High Court order transferring appeal to Resident Magistrate with extended jurisdiction despite failure to re-register or retitle pleadings.
* Evidence – identification and causation – reliability of post-accident identification of a vessel and burden to prove causation on balance of probabilities.
* Credibility – appellate review of factual findings – limits on reversal of trial court credibility findings.
|
20 November 2008 |
| October 2008 |
|
|
|
11 October 2008 |
|
Voir dire omission treated evidence as unsworn but corroborated by immediate complaints and PF3 medical reports; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – Rape of children – Identification in daylight – Corroboration of unsworn child evidence by prompt complaint and medical PF3 reports – Voir dire omission under s.127 Evidence Act treated evidence as unsworn – Admissibility of medical reports under s.240 Criminal Procedure Act and right to summon medical witness.
|
1 October 2008 |
| September 2008 |
|
|
Appellant's murder conviction quashed because postmortem evidence and cause of death were not proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – murder – sufficiency of evidence; postmortem report without pathologist’s testimony; cause of death uncertain; failure to prove malice aforethought; unsafe conviction quashed.
|
30 September 2008 |
|
Transfer to a magistrate after a preliminary hearing is valid; defective cautioned statement was expunged.
* Criminal procedure – transfer to resident magistrate with extended jurisdiction – transfer may be effected any time before trial begins, even after a preliminary hearing.
* Criminal procedure – preliminary hearing – preparatory step, not part of the trial; succeeding court may take fresh plea and adopt preliminary hearing results.
* Evidence – cautioned/retracted statement – admissibility – requirements of ss.50, 53 and 58 are substantive; defects render statement inadmissible.
* Evidence – credibility of witness with possible interest/accomplice status – demeanour and consistency may suffice for conviction if trial court’s assessment is accepted.
|
30 September 2008 |
|
Visual identification and repudiated confessions without corroboration rendered the murder convictions unsafe.
* Criminal law – visual identification – need to eliminate all possibilities of mistaken identity (Waziri Amani safeguards).
* Criminal procedure – repudiated/retracted caution statements – admissibility requires voluntariness and truth plus, where unreliable, corroboration.
* Evidence – internal contradictions and delays in arrest/identification undermine reliability of prosecution case.
|
30 September 2008 |
|
Proceedings before an untransferred magistrate can be severed, but a premature judicial ruling on insanity vitiates the trial.
* Criminal procedure – jurisdiction – Principal Resident Magistrate with extended jurisdiction must receive a transfer under s.256A(1) before trying High Court cases; failure renders those proceedings null and void but may be severable. * Criminal procedure – preliminary hearing s.192 – promotes expedition but is not invariably fundamental such that its absence vitiates subsequent trial. * Criminal law – insanity defence – judge must hear evidence and full submissions before determining legal insanity; premature decision may amount to mistrial. * Remedy – quashing of proceedings and ordering of a fresh trial where accused prejudiced by judicial pre-emption of defence.
|
30 September 2008 |
|
Transfer after a preliminary hearing does not automatically nullify trial; provocation reduced murder conviction to manslaughter.
Criminal procedure – transfer under s.256A(1) of Criminal Procedure Act – transfer may occur before or after High Court preliminary hearing; preliminary hearing under s.192 is preparatory – omission not fatal absent prejudice; provocation – benefit of doubt may reduce murder to manslaughter.
|
30 September 2008 |
|
Court upheld murder convictions based on reliable night-time visual identification and shared common intention to rob.
Criminal law — Visual identification at night — reliability assessed by opportunity, lighting (korobo and moonlight), prior acquaintance — inconsistencies due to lapse of time considered minor; Criminal law — joint/common intention (s.23 Penal Code) — robbery leading to probable consequence of fatal stabbing makes all participants liable for murder.
|
26 September 2008 |
|
Court upheld identification by familiar witnesses under dim lighting and applied s.23 common-intention liability, dismissing the appeal.
* Criminal law — Identification evidence — Visual identification at night under koroboi and moonlight — familiarity with accused — reliability and minor discrepancies. * Criminal law — Common intention (s.23 Penal Code) — liability for murder where fatal act is probable consequence of jointly pursued unlawful purpose (robbery).
|
26 September 2008 |
|
Court upheld night-time visual identification by familiar witnesses and found common intention, dismissing appeal against murder convictions.
Criminal law – Murder – Visual identification at night – Familiarity of witnesses, lighting (koroboi and moonlight), proximity and duration of observation – Minor discrepancies after lapse of time not fatal to identification; Common intention – section 23 Penal Code – liability for offence committed in prosecution of unlawful common purpose.
|
26 September 2008 |
|
Lengthy remand custody must be considered in sentencing; appellate courts may reduce excessive sentences accordingly.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Manslaughter – Lengthy remand custody as a mitigating factor – Appellate interference with sentence; Excessive punishment; Plea of guilty; Remand delays.
|
26 September 2008 |
|
Applicant's provocation defence failed; cooling time and credible prosecution evidence upheld murder conviction.
Criminal law – Murder – Provocation (ss. 201–202 Penal Code) – heat of passion – requirement of immediacy/cooling time – credibility of witnesses – appellate re‑appraisal of evidence.
|
26 September 2008 |
|
Provocation rejected—armed return after cooling time; murder conviction and death sentence upheld.
Criminal law – Murder – Provocation (ss. 201–202 Penal Code) – Sudden provocation requires a wrongful act/insult and no cooling time; lapse and arming negate provocation; appellate re-appraisal of credibility under procedural rule.
|
26 September 2008 |
| January 2008 |
|
|
Failure to state grounds in a Notice of Motion renders it incurably defective; Notice struck out with costs.
Civil procedure — Notice of Motion — Rule 45(1) and Form A require grounds to be stated in the Notice; affidavits under Rule 46(1) supply facts, not grounds — failure to state grounds is incurably defective — Court may strike out incompetent notices and may hear objections under inherent powers to prevent abuse of process.
|
1 January 2008 |
|
|
1 January 2008 |