|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| November 2018 |
|
|
Appeal dismissed: improper police identification but child’s credible evidence and no fatal variance with the charge sheet.
* Criminal law – Rape of a child; identification parades – improperly conducted police‑station identification; prior acquaintance of victim; admissibility and weight of identification evidence; credibility of child witness – delay in naming assailant explained by threats and trauma; variance between charge sheet and evidence – correction during testimony; concurrent findings of fact on appeal.
|
19 November 2018 |
|
Where long cohabitation gave rise to a presumption of marriage, the partner properly received administration; Primary Court probate instituted while appeal pending was quashed.
Probate and administration — Validity of notices and time limits for filing appeals — effect of enlargement of time for notice of appeal on memorandum filing period; Notice formalities — clerical omission cured by court endorsement; Applicable law to succession — Indian Succession Act applied where deceased’s conduct was not in accordance with Islamic tenets; Presumption of marriage — section 160(1) Law of Marriage Act, rebuttable presumption where parties cohabit and acquire reputation as husband and wife; Administration appointment — partner entitled to letters where presumption not rebutted; Revisional powers — quashing Primary Court probate proceedings instituted while appeal pending as abuse of process.
|
19 November 2018 |
|
Appeal allowed: conviction unsafe where torchlight ID, coerced confession, and recent-possession proof were unreliable.
Criminal appeal – competency of appeal where charge sheet missing; visual identification by torchlight – unreliability; voluntariness of extrajudicial confession – tainted by mob whipping; doctrine of recent possession – requirements of possession, positive identification, recentness and specification in charge; conviction safety and quashing where evidence insufficient.
|
19 November 2018 |
|
Conviction quashed where prosecution omitted a material witness and courts failed to consider the applicant's defence.
Criminal law – Rape of a child – Failure to call a material witness who features in complainant’s account – Adverse inference – Failure of trial court to consider accused’s defence vitiates conviction – Procedural misdescription of conviction curable under s.388(1) CPA where no miscarriage of justice shown.
|
19 November 2018 |
| September 2018 |
|
|
Failure to call a material witness and the trial courts’ omission to consider the defence rendered the conviction unsafe.
* Criminal law – Rape – proof beyond reasonable doubt – duty of prosecution to call material witnesses and adverse inference where omission unexplained. * Evidence – failure to consider accused’s defence – failure fatal and vitiates conviction. * Criminal Procedure Act – misdirection in citing wrong statutory provision – curable under section 388(1).
|
20 September 2018 |
|
Appeal struck out for one-day late filing of memorandum; respondents awarded costs due to absence of certificate of delay.
* Civil procedure – Appeal competence – late filing of memorandum of appeal – Rule 90(1) Court of Appeal Rules 2009 – appeal incompetent and struck out.
* Civil procedure – Computation of time – Rule 8(d) – calendar calculation.
* Civil procedure – Certificate of delay – proviso to Rule 90(1) – absence of certificate fatal to excuse for late filing.
* Costs – Rule 114(1) – costs follow the event; applicable to successful preliminary objections; no reason shown to deprive successful party of costs.
|
19 September 2018 |
|
Improper police identification does not overturn conviction where victim’s credible testimony and corroborative medical evidence remain intact.
Criminal law – Rape of a minor – identification parade improperly conducted; prior acquaintance of victim and accused; evaluation of victim’s credibility; effect of date discrepancy between charge and evidence; sufficiency of alibi evidence.
|
18 September 2018 |
|
Conviction quashed where seizure and late cautioned statement were defective and visual identification was unsafe.
* Criminal law – Armed robbery – Visual identification – Requirements for safe identification; identification parade where identifiers are strangers.
* Criminal procedure – Cautioned statement – Recording within statutory period (four hours) and voluntariness; delayed statements expunged.
* Evidence – Certificate of seizure and chain of custody – Recent possession doctrine inapplicable where arrested without recovered property and recovery not explained.
* Criminal procedure – Variance in dates – minor irregularity curable under CPA s.234(3).
* Evidence – Informers and police witnesses – no automatic requirement for independent corroboration, but prosecution must establish reliable linkage between accused and offense.
|
18 September 2018 |
|
Appellants' appeal dismissed: evidence and chain of custody were sufficient; s34B statement admissible; judge gave adequate reasons for differing from assessors.
Criminal law – narcotics trafficking – sufficiency of evidence – trivial discrepancies do not dismantle prosecution case; Chain of custody – requirement to account for exhibits from seizure to analysis; Evidence Act s.34B – admissibility of written statement where no timely objection/notice by defence; Trial procedure – judge must give reasons when differing from assessors; Sentencing – use of uncontested certificate of market value.
|
17 September 2018 |
|
Appellants' convictions quashed: identification unreliable and cautioned statements and PF3 improperly admitted.
Criminal law — visual identification (recognition) — Waziri Amani requirements (distance, duration, lighting, prior acquaintance) — cautioned and extra‑judicial statements — necessity of inquiry/trial‑within‑trial into voluntariness — PF3 admissibility — compliance with s.240(3) Criminal Procedure Act — failure to prove case beyond reasonable doubt.
|
17 September 2018 |
|
Whether identification and improperly admitted PF3/confessions can sustain a conviction beyond reasonable doubt.
* Criminal law – armed robbery – visual identification by recognition – Waziri Amani caution – requirements for ‘absolutely watertight’ identification. * Criminal procedure – cautioned and extra‑judicial statements – inquiry/trial within trial required where voluntariness is challenged. * Criminal procedure – PF3 (medical report) – non‑compliance with section 240(3) CPA renders PF3 inadmissible. * Evidence – doctrine of recent possession – importance of proof of provenance and chain of custody.
|
17 September 2018 |
|
A charge failing to cite the specific sentencing provision for under‑ten rape vitiates the trial and prejudices the appellant.
* Criminal law – Charge and statement of offence – requirement to specify statute creating offence and relevant sentencing provision where applicable.
* Rape – statutory rape of child under ten – necessity to cite section 131(3) prescribing life imprisonment in statement of offence.
* Fair trial – prejudice from defective charge – vitiation of conviction and sentence.
* Appellate powers – invocation of section 4(2) AJA to quash proceedings and set aside sentence.
* Retrial – not ordered where original proceedings were founded on a fatally defective charge.
|
13 September 2018 |
|
Applicant failed to show good cause for extension of time due to unexplained delay and non‑urgent points of law.
* Civil procedure — Extension of time — Rule 10 Court of Appeal Rules — Good cause required; technical delay (incompetent appeal struck out) may constitute good cause if prompt action taken — every day of delay must be explained. * Negligence of counsel — generally not sufficient to constitute good cause. * Points of law — must be of sufficient public importance and apparent on the face of the record to ground an extension.
|
10 September 2018 |
|
Technical delay from a struck‑out appeal can justify extension, but unexplained days of delay defeat the application.
Civil procedure — Extension of time (Rule 10) — Good cause — Technical delay from struck‑out appeal may constitute good cause — Every day of delay must be explained — Negligence of counsel not ordinarily good cause — Point of law must be of public importance and apparent on record.
|
7 September 2018 |
|
Conviction unsafe where uncorroborated interested witness, unreliable night identification and non-production of crucial witness raise reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Evidence – witness with interest/accomplice-like danger of uncorroborated testimony; corroboration must relate to critical facts; adverse inference for non-production of crucial prosecution witness; identification at night – reliability and reasonable doubt.
|
7 September 2018 |
|
A defective charge citing wrong or non-existent Penal Code provisions vitiated the trial, leading to quashing of conviction and sentence.
Criminal procedure – defective charge – incorrect or non-existent statutory citation; shopbreaking (s.296) versus burglary (s.294); theft charge (s.265) not s.269; right to know charge – fair trial – conviction quashed.
|
7 September 2018 |
|
Absence of formally filed DPP consent and certificate rendered trial and appeal proceedings null; retrial ordered with credit for time served.
Criminal procedure — Requirement of DPP's consent and certificate for economic offences; jurisdictional defect renders proceedings a nullity; revisional power to quash and order retrial; sentencing to reflect time served.
|
7 September 2018 |
|
A defective charge citing wrong statutory provisions denied the appellant a fair trial; convictions quashed and sentences set aside.
* Criminal law – defective charge – wrong or non-existent statutory references – shopbreaking vs burglary (s.296 vs s.294) – theft charge (s.265) * Statutory requirement – section 135 Criminal Procedure Act – charge must describe offence and cite creating enactment * Prejudice and fair trial – defective charge vitiates conviction * Remedy – convictions quashed and sentences set aside; immediate release unless otherwise lawfully held
|
6 September 2018 |
|
Absence of required DPP consent and certificate rendered trial and appeal null; retrial ordered with credit for time served.
* Criminal procedure – jurisdictional requirements – DPP's consent and certificate under Economic and Organised Crime Control Act – absence renders trial a nullity. * Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.4(2) – power to nullify proceedings and order retrial. * Sentencing – credit for custody time where retrial leads to conviction.
|
6 September 2018 |
|
A charge citing wrong Penal Code sections after amendment vitiates the trial; conviction and sentence quashed and appellant released.
Criminal procedure — Statement of offence must cite the statute and section creating the offence (s.135(a)(ii) CPA); citation of wrong or obsolete Penal Code provisions is fatal and renders trial a nullity; defect not curable under s.388 CPA where law has been amended; appellate revision under s.4(2) AJA can quash proceedings, conviction and sentence and order release.
|
6 September 2018 |
|
Failure to specify the rape category (s.130(2)(a)) in the charge renders the trial unfair; conviction quashed and release ordered.
Criminal law – Rape – Particulars of charge – A charge under s.130(1) Penal Code must specify which category in s.130(2) is relied upon; omission of s.130(2)(a) is a fatal defect vitiating trial. Criminal procedure – Revisional powers (s.4(2) AJA) – Where prosecution error causes fundamental defect, retrial not ordered; conviction and sentence may be quashed and accused released.
|
6 September 2018 |
|
Change of trial magistrate without recorded reasons renders subsequent proceedings void and warrants retrial to prevent prejudice.
Criminal procedure – succession of magistrates – section 214(1) CPA – reasons for reassignment must be recorded; successor without reasons lacks jurisdiction and proceedings are nullity – prejudice and fairness – invocation of s.4(2) AJA to quash and order trial de novo – sentence commencement on retrial.
|
6 September 2018 |
|
Conviction based on uncorroborated interested witness testimony and weak identification is unsafe and quashed.
Criminal law – Unlawful possession of firearm and ammunition; conviction based on evidence of witness with interest; need for corroboration on material facts; adverse inference for failure to call crucial witness; unreliable night identification; prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
|
5 September 2018 |
|
Conviction based on an equivocal, improperly recorded plea was quashed and remitted for a fresh plea.
* Criminal procedure – Pleas of guilty – Requirements under section 228(1)–(2) – accused’s plea must be recorded in his own words and be unequivocal.
* Preliminary facts and agreed facts – prosecution must place statement of facts on record; facts relevant to sentence must be stated by prosecution not merely by accused.
* Revisional jurisdiction – Appellate court may quash conviction where plea and recording procedure are defective (s.4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act).
* Case law – Adan v Republic (1973) EA 445 – procedure for recording pleas and facts.
|
5 September 2018 |
|
Succession of magistrates without recorded reasons renders subsequent proceedings void and necessitates a trial de novo.
Criminal procedure – succession of magistrates – section 214(1) Criminal Procedure Act – requirement to record reasons when reassigning partly heard matters; jurisdiction – successor magistrate without recorded reasons lacks jurisdiction and proceedings are nullity; appellate revisional powers – section 4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act – quashing of proceedings and ordering trial de novo; prejudice and fair trial rights.
|
5 September 2018 |
|
Conviction based on an imperfect, equivocal plea was quashed and the case remitted for a fresh plea.
* Criminal procedure – plea of guilty – requirements under section 228(1)–(2) and Adan v The Republic – prosecution to state facts and accused to be given opportunity to accept or dispute – equivocal/imperfect plea vitiates conviction and warrants quashing and remittal for fresh plea.
|
4 September 2018 |
| August 2018 |
|
|
Failure to direct assessors on vital legal issues vitiated murder convictions; retrial refused due to identification doubts.
Criminal procedure – trials with assessors – duty to sum up to assessors on vital points of law (identification/recognition, alibi, common intention, malice aforethought); misdirection or non-direction to assessors vitiates proceedings; identification uncertainty may render retrial inappropriate.
|
31 August 2018 |
|
Uncorroborated claim of a misplaced review application failed to establish good cause for extension of time.
Criminal procedure — extension of time to file review — application under Rules 10 and 48(1) — requirement to show good cause — uncorroborated allegation of prior filing/misplacement by Registrar insufficient.
|
31 August 2018 |
|
Trial court lacked jurisdiction on economic crimes absent endorsed DPP consent; proceedings quashed and retrial ordered for count four.
Criminal law – Economic crimes – Jurisdiction of courts to try offences under the Economic and Organised Crime Control Act – Requirement of DPP's consent and certificate to confer jurisdiction on non-economic-crimes court – Absence of endorsement on consent/certificate – Proceedings nullity – Retrial ordered.
|
30 August 2018 |
|
|
30 August 2018 |
|
Applicant's unsupported claim of a mislaid review application failed to establish good cause for extension of time.
* Criminal procedure – extension of time – application for leave to file review out of time – applicant must show good cause.
* Evidentiary requirement – allegations of prior filing or misplacement require corroboration (affidavits of prison officer or court officer).
* Exercise of judicial discretion – unexplained/unsubstantiated delay does not justify extension.
|
30 August 2018 |
|
Conviction quashed where admitted facts did not establish rape and incorrect statutory provisions were used.
Criminal law – plea of guilty – exceptions permitting appeal; sufficiency of facts for rape – necessity of proof of penetration/sexual intercourse; statutory basis – sections 5 & 6 of Sexual Offences Special Provisions Act No.4/1998 not framing rape charge; conviction quashed for legal and factual defects.
|
29 August 2018 |
|
An unsworn interpreter rendered the trial unfair; evidence expunged and convictions quashed, with sentences set aside.
Criminal procedure – interpreter – requirement to swear interpreter under Oaths and Statutory Declarations Act – evidence given in language not understood by accused must be interpreted (s.211 CPA) – failure to swear interpreter vitiates trial and may lead to expungement of evidence; revisionary powers (s.4(2) AJA) – quashing of convictions and setting aside sentences.
|
29 August 2018 |
|
Extension of time granted where applicant promptly acted after earlier review was struck out as procedurally incompetent.
* Civil procedure – Extension of time under Rule 10 – Good cause required – Factors: length of delay, reason for delay, prejudice to respondent. * Previous review struck out for incompetence (technical defect) can justify extension if initial filing was within time. * Prisoner litigant’s prompt action and registry advice relevant to excusing delay.
|
29 August 2018 |
|
Failure to enter a formal conviction renders the trial judgment a nullity; Court quashed judgments and remitted record for proper judgment.
* Criminal procedure – Requirement to enter a formal conviction under section 235(1) CPA – Failure to convict renders judgment a nullity.
* Appeals – High Court lacks competence to determine an appeal against a non-existent valid judgment.
* Appellate revision – Court of Appeal may invoke s.4(2) AJA to quash null judgments and remit record for proper judgment.
* Sentencing – Valid custodial sentences, if later imposed, may be backdated to date of original (invalid) sentencing; pending appeals to be expedited.
|
29 August 2018 |
|
Extension of time requires good cause and an arguable case; High Court has exclusive leave jurisdiction in land matters.
* Civil procedure – Extension of time – Rules 10 and 45(b) Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 – Applicant must show good cause and an arguable case; * Land law – Leave to appeal – Section 47(1) Cap. 216 – exclusive jurisdiction of the High Court to grant leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal; * Futility – Court will refuse extension where proposed relief is precluded by jurisdictional bar.
|
28 August 2018 |
|
Failure to enter a formal conviction renders a trial judgment a nullity and vitiates subsequent appellate proceedings.
Criminal procedure — Requirement to enter a formal conviction — Sections 235(1) and 312(2) Criminal Procedure Act — Failure to enter conviction renders trial judgment a nullity; Appellate jurisdiction — High Court cannot determine appeal where no valid trial judgment exists — appeal incompetent; Revisional powers — Section 4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act — quashing judgments emanating from a nullity and remittal for proper judgment; Sentencing — backdating custodial sentences to original sentencing date where conviction subsequently entered; Jurisdiction — trial court lacks jurisdiction after notices of appeal lodged.
|
28 August 2018 |
|
|
27 August 2018 |
|
Applicant failed to prove good cause for nearly five‑year delay; extension of time to file review refused.
* Civil Procedure – Extension of time – Rule 10 Court of Appeal Rules – "good cause" requirement – consideration of length and reason for delay and prejudice to respondent. * Evidential requirement – supporting affidavit must be corroborated by documents where available (e.g., copy of earlier application, court file number, withdrawal order). * Prisoners – alleged inability to act due to custody not sufficient without proof that documents were prepared and transmitted.
|
27 August 2018 |
|
|
24 August 2018 |
|
Conviction quashed where identification was unsafe and seizure and cautioned statement procedures were defective.
* Criminal law – visual identification – dock identification – necessity for favourable conditions and identification parade where identifier and suspect are strangers.
* Criminal procedure – cautioned statement – recording within statutory four-hour period – failure to comply results in expungement.
* Evidence – certificate of seizure and recent possession – requirement of immediate search/recovery and unbroken chain of custody.
* Conviction safety – cumulative effect of defective identification, seizure and cautioning renders conviction unsafe.
|
4 August 2018 |
|
Failure to state the specific sentencing subsection for child rape deprived the applicant of a fair trial, vitiating the proceedings.
* Criminal procedure — Charge particulars — requirement to state the specific statutory provision creating the offence and, where applicable, the specific sentencing subsection for serious offences; * Fair trial — prejudice where accused not informed of severe statutory sentence (life imprisonment); * Appellate jurisdiction — exercise of revisionary powers under s.4(2) AJA to quash proceedings and set aside sentence; * Retrial — inappropriate where charge is fatally defective and no valid charge exists.
|
1 August 2018 |
| February 2018 |
|
|
Appeal allowed: conviction unsafe due to weak identification, material date variance and omission to call key witness.
* Criminal law - Rape - adequacy of identification evidence; variance between charge sheet and evidence on date; duty to call material witnesses; adverse inference for omission; conviction entered under wrong provision.
|
20 February 2018 |
|
Absence of a High Court transfer order invalidated subordinate court appeal proceedings; conviction quashed for defective charge.
Criminal procedure – Transfer of appeals (s45(2) Magistrates' Courts Act) – requirement of High Court transfer order for resident magistrate with extended jurisdiction; Appellate Jurisdiction Act s11 – extension of time to appeal – application to subordinate court exercising extended powers; Charge particulars – s135(a)(ii) Criminal Procedure Act – defective charge for failure to specify statutory provision/category; Remedy – conviction and sentence quashed; immediate release ordered.
|
20 February 2018 |
|
Missing written summing up to assessors vitiates the trial; conviction set aside and retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure — Assessors — Mandatory aid of assessors under s.265 CPA — Judge’s duty to sum up and record assessors’ opinions under s.298(1) CPA — Missing written summing up notes a fatal irregularity — Proceedings vitiated; retrial ordered.
|
20 February 2018 |
|
Failure to conduct voir dire and procedural breaches in admitting PF3 and cautioned statement undermined the rape conviction.
Criminal law – child witness competency (s.127(2) Evidence Act) and necessity of voir dire; medical report admissibility and s.240(3) Criminal Procedure Act; cautioned statement four‑hour rule under s.50 Criminal Procedure Act; effect of unexplained delay in reporting sexual offences on credibility.
|
20 February 2018 |
|
Proceedings were a nullity where DPP authorised trial in Resident Magistrate's Court but case heard in District Court.
Jurisdiction – DPP certificate under s.12(3) Economic and Organized Crimes Control Act – proceedings in wrong subordinate court render proceedings a nullity; retrial discretionary – Fatehali Manji principle; interests of justice where appellants have served sentence; appellate power under s.4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act to quash.
|
19 February 2018 |
|
Successor magistrate’s failure to record reasons and material prosecutorial date inconsistencies rendered the conviction unsafe.
* Criminal procedure – change of magistrate – section 214(1) CPA – successor must record reasons for taking over; * Right to fair trial – succession without reasons vitiates proceedings; * Evidence – material variance in date of offence between charge sheet and investigator’s testimony undermines prosecution case; * Appellate jurisdiction – section 4(2) AJA – power to nullify proceedings, set aside sentence and order release.
|
19 February 2018 |
|
The appellant's conviction was quashed for failure to enter conviction and for contradictory, weak evidence and identification.
Criminal procedure — mandatory requirement to enter conviction before sentence (s.235(1) CPA) — failure renders judgment a nullity; Variance between charge and evidence; contradictions among prosecution witnesses; caution with visual identification evidence; retrial not in interests of justice where prosecution case is weak.
|
19 February 2018 |
|
Failure to enter a conviction before sentencing vitiated the judgment; prosecution evidence was also inconsistent and unreliable.
Criminal procedure – mandatory entry of conviction before sentence (sections 235(1) & 312(2) CPA) – failure renders judgment a nullity; Variance between charge particulars and prosecution evidence; Visual identification evidence requires caution; Retrial not appropriate where prosecution case is weak.
|
19 February 2018 |