|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2019 |
|
|
Failure to enter convictions renders the trial judgment a nullity and requires remission for a proper judgment.
* Criminal procedure – Failure to enter conviction – fatal and incurable irregularity – renders judgment a nullity.
* Appellate procedure – Competency of appeal where trial judgment is nullity – appeal should be struck out, not determined on merits.
* Remedy – invocation of s.4(2) AJA to revise/nullify proceedings; remit file to trial court to compose proper judgment under ss.235(1) and 312(2) CPA.
* Subsequent post-appeal entry of conviction or compliance order has no legal effect where original judgment was nullity.
|
13 December 2019 |
|
Failure to enter conviction renders the trial judgment a nullity; appeal was incompetent and record must be remitted for proper judgment.
* Criminal procedure — Failure to enter conviction after finding guilt — renders judgment a nullity; appeal from nullity is incompetent.
* Appellate procedure — Where absence of conviction is discovered, appeal should be struck out, not decided on merits then remitted.
* Remedy — Revision under s.4(2) AJA: set aside trial judgment and sentences; quash appellate proceedings arising from nullity; remit record for composition of proper judgment under ss.235(1) and 312(2) CPA.
|
13 December 2019 |
|
Prisoner who swears he handed appeal documents to prison officer shows good cause; prison officer affidavit not mandatory.
Criminal procedure – extension of time to lodge appeal – prisoner custody – notice/petition presented to prison officer – whether prisoner must produce prison officer's affidavit – good cause construed widely where delay outside applicant's control.
|
12 December 2019 |
|
Prisoners who hand signed notices to prison officers may have inordinate delay excused as 'good cause' when officers fail to transmit them.
Criminal procedure — Extension of time — Appellants in custody who sign and hand notice of appeal to prison officer — Duty of prison officer under s.361(1)(a) and s.363 CPA — 'Good cause' interpreted widely to include delay caused by prison officers — Absence of respondent's contradictory affidavit — High Court's duty to consider parties' submissions before exercising discretion.
|
12 December 2019 |
|
Failure to enter conviction renders a trial judgment a nullity and requires remittal for a properly composed judgment.
* Criminal procedure – mandatory conviction before sentence – section 235(1) CPA; failure to convict is fatal and renders judgment a nullity; appellate procedure where trial judgment is nullity: appeal incompetent and should be struck out, not determined on merits. * Remedy – invoke revisional jurisdiction (s.4(2) AJA) to nullify trial and appellate proceedings emanating from nullity and remit record for proper judgment in compliance with ss.235(1) and 312(2) CPA. * Subsequent mere entry of conviction after appeal lodged is ineffective unless accompanied by a properly composed judgment.
|
12 December 2019 |
|
Appeal dismissed: reconstructed record sufficient; identification and conduct proved armed robbery; alibi properly rejected for lack of notice and proof.
* Criminal law – armed robbery – elements: use of weapon/threat to obtain or retain property – proof of amputation not an ingredient of offence. * Criminal procedure – incomplete/missing record – appeal may proceed on reconstructed record if adequate to decide grounds of appeal. * Criminal procedure – charge and plea – substituted charge read and pleaded is sufficient; failure to re-read immediately before trial not fatal absent prejudice. * Evidence – identification and recognition – credibility of locus in quo identification and later recognition at arrest can safely ground conviction notwithstanding omissions as to attire/time. * Defence – alibi – requirement to give prior notice (s.194(4) CPA); belated alibi without particulars or witnesses may be accorded no weight.
|
12 December 2019 |
|
Appeal dismissed: Court allowed hearing on reconstructed record and upheld conviction for armed robbery; alibi and procedural complaints failed.
Criminal law – armed robbery – identification and recognition evidence; Procedural law – hearing on reconstructed/incomplete record; Charge particulars and curative provisions (s388 CPA); Alibi notice and proof (s194 CPA); Judgment contents and sentencing (s312 CPA).
|
12 December 2019 |
|
Recording witnesses in reported speech contrary to s210(1)(b) CPA vitiated the trial and appellate proceedings; retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure – Recording of evidence – Section 210(1)(b) CPA – Evidence must be recorded in narrative (first‑person) form, not reported speech; failure vitiates proceedings; appellate revision under s.4(2) AJA; retrial ordered.
|
12 December 2019 |
|
Recording witnesses in reported speech breaches s.210(1)(b) CPA, vitiates proceedings and justifies quashing and retrial.
Criminal procedure — Recording of evidence — Section 210(1)(b) CPA requires witness evidence to be recorded in narrative, not reported speech; failure to do so prejudices parties and vitiates proceedings — Proceedings and derived appellate judgments are nullities — Power under s.4(2) AJA to revise, quash and order retrial.
|
12 December 2019 |
|
Trial court's failure to consider the appellant's defence and unrecorded demeanour remarks vitiated the conviction; judgments quashed.
* Criminal procedure – Composition of judgment – Requirement under s.312(1) CPA to state points for determination, decision and reasons – failure to consider defence vitiates judgment.
* Appeals – Duty of first appellate court to re-evaluate entire record of evidence, not confine to grounds of appeal.
* Evidence – Demeanour observations must be recorded during testimony (s.212 CPA); unrecorded demeanour remarks inadmissible in judgment.
* Remedy – Quashing of convictions and remittal for proper judgment where statutory requirements not met.
|
12 December 2019 |
|
Failure to consider the accused’s defence in judgment vitiates conviction and requires quashing and remand.
Criminal procedure – Judgment requirements under section 312(1) CPA – duty to consider and weigh the accused’s defence; Appellate duty to re-evaluate entire evidence; Demeanour observations must be recorded during testimony (section 212 CPA); Failure to consider defence vitiates conviction.
|
12 December 2019 |
|
Failure to consider the accused's defence in the trial court's judgment vitiated the conviction; judgments quashed and matter remitted.
Criminal procedure – Judgment requirements under section 312(1) CPA – A judgment must state points for determination, decision and reasons and show that material evidence (including defence) was considered; Failure to consider defence vitiates conviction; Appellate court’s duty to re-evaluate entire evidence afresh; Demeanour must be recorded in proceedings (section 212 CPA).
|
12 December 2019 |
|
A charge founded on a repealed statute vitiates the trial; proceedings and sentence were nullified and the appellant released.
Criminal law – Charge founded on repealed statute – Repeal by subsequent Act – Effect of repeal and savings – Requirement under section 135(a)(ii) CPA to cite valid statute – Fatal defect vitiating trial – Revisionary powers under section 4(2) AJA – Retrial discretionary where accused already served substantial illegal sentence.
|
11 December 2019 |
|
Defective charge particulars and irregular plea-taking rendered the guilty plea equivocal and the armed robbery conviction unsafe.
Criminal procedure — Plea of guilty — When a plea is equivocal or unfinished; defective particulars in charge sheet and prejudice — Cure under section 388(1) CPA depends on absence of prejudice — Proper plea-taking procedure; prosecution to state facts; inadmissibility of seeking further evidence from accused via adjournment to Justice of the Peace — Admitted documents must be read in court; failure may cause miscarriage of justice.
|
11 December 2019 |
|
Court quashed armed robbery conviction where plea was equivocal and trial procedure was irregular and prejudicial.
Criminal procedure – plea of guilty – when a plea is equivocal or unfinished – requirement to disclose essential particulars (weapon) in charge sheet – curability under s.388 CPA depends on prejudice – improper adjournment to record confession before a Justice of the Peace – admitted exhibits must be read out in court – cumulative irregularities amounting to miscarriage of justice.
|
11 December 2019 |
|
Convictions quashed after court expunged un‑read cautioned and extra‑judicial statements for fatal procedural irregularity.
Evidence — Procedure for documentary exhibits — exhibits must be cleared for admission, admitted, then read out in court; failure is fatal. Confessions and extra‑judicial statements — voluntariness objections must be raised before admission; trial within trial required when properly objected. Magistrates' Courts Act/Government Notice — Ward Executive Officers as Justices of the Peace may record extra‑judicial statements. Narration of documents before admission — may be improper but not necessarily fatal if exhibit ultimately admitted; failure to read admitted exhibits is fatal.
|
11 December 2019 |
|
Failure to read admitted cautioned and extra‑judicial statements in court is a fatal irregularity leading to expungement and quashed convictions.
Criminal procedure — Admission of documentary evidence — Cautioned and extra-judicial statements — Requirement to clear, admit, and read exhibits in court — Failure to read admitted exhibits is fatal and causes expungement; Ward Executive Officer authority under GN No. 369/2004 and MCA ss.51,57.
|
11 December 2019 |
|
Insufficient night-time identification evidence led to quashing of armed robbery convictions and ordered release.
Criminal law — Visual identification — Sufficiency of evidence as to source and intensity of light — Need to describe assailants to the first person(s) encountered and to police to dispel mistaken identity — Application of Waziri Aman factors and authorities (Issa Mgara, Mohamed Alui, Philipo Rukandiza).
|
11 December 2019 |
|
Convictions quashed where visual identification was unsafe due to inadequate description and unexplained lighting conditions.
Criminal law – Visual identification – Reliability of identification where incident occurred at night – Need to describe source and intensity of light – Requirement to give description at first opportunity and corroboration by first persons encountered – Application of Waziri Aman and related authorities – Convictions quashed for unsafe identification.
|
11 December 2019 |
|
A charge founded on a statute repealed before arraignment is fatal; proceedings nullified and conviction set aside.
Criminal law – Charge must cite valid statutory provision – Repeal of statute (AAA) by FACA (s.73) renders charges under repealed law invalid – Section 135(a)(ii) CPA mandatory – Defect fatal and not cured by s.388(1) CPA – Revisionary powers (AJA s.4(2)) to nullify proceedings – Retrial discretionary where accused served substantial custody.
|
10 December 2019 |
|
An equivocal plea and procedural defects (omitted particulars, unread exhibits, adjournment to JP) vitiated the armed robbery conviction.
Criminal procedure – plea of guilty – unequivocal vs equivocal plea – essential ingredients of armed robbery (weapon) must be disclosed in particulars; defective particulars may be curable under s.388(1) CPA only where no prejudice arises – trial court must read admitted documents in open court – improper adjournment to record statements at Justice of the Peace can prejudice accused – cumulative procedural irregularities vitiate conviction.
|
10 December 2019 |
|
Prisoners handing appeal documents to prison officers can constitute good cause for extension of time; prison officer affidavit not always required.
Criminal procedure – extension of time under section 361(2) CPA – good cause – prisoners handing notices to prison officers – necessity of prison officer’s affidavit – contextual reading of documents filed by unrepresented incarcerated litigants.
|
10 December 2019 |
|
Child’s improperly recorded voire dire and uncorroborated evidence made the conviction unsafe; appeal allowed and conviction quashed.
* Criminal law – sexual offences against a child – necessity and effect of proper voire dire under section 127(2) Evidence Act – unsworn child evidence requires corroboration. * Evidence – admissibility and proper tendering of exhibits – duty to have exhibits identified and contents read to accused; failure to do so warrants expungement. * Circumstantial evidence – last‑seen inference and need for absence of other reasonable explanations; unexplained delays and inconsistencies may render conviction unsafe. * Appellate procedure – issues not raised and decided below cannot be raised for first time on appeal.
|
10 December 2019 |
|
Conviction quashed where child’s uncorroborated unsworn testimony and unread photographic exhibits created reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – sexual offences – voire dire for child witnesses – unsworn evidence requiring corroboration; admissibility and reading of exhibits to accused – failure to read photographs = expunged; circumstantial 'last seen' evidence – must exclude other reasonable inferences; appellate jurisdiction – issues not raised/decided below not entertained on first appeal.
|
10 December 2019 |
|
Conviction unsafe where stolen items were not conclusively identified in court; appellate sentence enhancement was unjustified.
Criminal law – identification of stolen property – complainant must identify exhibits conclusively in court; mere identification at police station or by make insufficient; ownership must be proved. Criminal procedure – appeal against conviction – doubts in prosecution case resolved for accused. Sentencing – concurrent vs consecutive sentences for offences in same transaction; appellate enhancement and invocation of Minimum Sentences Act where inapplicable; manifestly excessive sentences.
|
10 December 2019 |
|
Failure to read admitted confessional and extra-judicial statements in court is fatal, warranting expungement and quashing of convictions.
* Evidence — Confessions and extra-judicial statements — admissibility requires voluntariness and lawful recording; objections must precede admission for trial-within-trial to be held.
* Criminal procedure — Documentary exhibits must be cleared for admission and read out in court after admission; failure to do so is a fatal irregularity.
* Magistrates' Courts Act/Government Notice — Ward Executive Officers may be empowered to act as justices of the peace to record extra-judicial statements where lawful instrument authorizes them.
* Appeal — Where conviction rests solely on expunged statements, conviction and sentence must be quashed.
|
10 December 2019 |
|
Convictions quashed because night-time visual identification evidence was insufficient to exclude mistaken identity.
Criminal law – Visual identification at night – necessity to describe source and intensity of light; requirement to give detailed description to first person met and police to dispel mistaken identity – Waziri Aman principles applied – failure to corroborate description by first contacts undermines prosecution case.
|
10 December 2019 |
|
Conviction quashed for inadequate identification and ownership proof; appellate sentence enhancement held excessive and improper.
* Criminal law — Identification of stolen property — Complainant must identify items conclusively in court; mere description or police‑station identification insufficient. * Proof of ownership — ownership must be established by tangible evidence. * Sentencing — appellate court should not enhance sentences improperly; Minimum Sentences Act inapplicable; concurrent sentences ordinarily appropriate for offences in same transaction. * Appeal — doubts in prosecution case resolved in favour of accused.
|
9 December 2019 |
|
A notice of appeal may be struck out where the appellant fails to take essential procedural steps to prosecute the appeal.
* Civil procedure – Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 – Rule 89(2): strike out notice of appeal where an essential step has not been taken.
* Civil procedure – Rule 90(1): time for lodging appeal and role of Registrar’s certificate of delay.
* Failure to prosecute an appeal after lodging a notice and obtaining leave justifies striking out.
* Failure to file a reply affidavit deemed acceptance of applicant’s affidavit evidence; delay reasons belong to extension proceedings.
|
6 December 2019 |
|
An unequivocal guilty plea bars appeal against conviction; minor procedural errors did not vitiate the conviction.
Criminal law – Plea of guilty – Unequivocal plea bars appeal against conviction except as to extent or legality of sentence – Laurence Mpinga exceptions – Procedural irregularity (delay in producing accused; minor discrepancy in charge) that does not occasion prejudice.
|
6 December 2019 |
|
Extension granted where prior struck-out proceedings caused technical delay; High Court retains exclusive leave jurisdiction in land matters.
* Land law – leave to appeal in land matters – section 47(1) LDCA vests exclusive jurisdiction in the High Court; Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to grant leave in such matters except as provided by law. * Civil procedure – extension of time – Rule 10 Court of Appeal Rules – requirement of good cause. * Procedural law – technical delay – time spent pursuing incompetent or struck-out proceedings may be excused (Fortunatus Masha principle). * Appellate restraint – court hearing extension applications should not decide substantive issues of the intended appeal.
|
6 December 2019 |
|
Failure to read an admitted documentary exhibit to the accused prejudices trial fairness and can nullify conviction.
Criminal procedure – documentary evidence – admission of documents but failure to read contents to accused – irregular admission and expungement; right to a fair trial – prejudice from not knowing exhibit’s contents; overriding objective not a cure for fundamental unfairness; conviction collapses if prosecution case rests wholly on expunged exhibit.
|
6 December 2019 |
|
A notice of appeal was struck out for failure to take essential steps; hearsay and oral assertions were inadequate.
* Civil procedure – striking out notice of appeal – rule 89(2) Court of Appeal Rules; essential steps to prosecute appeal; insufficiency of hearsay and after-the-bar statements; necessity of affidavit evidence from competent deponent regarding missing court records.
|
5 December 2019 |
|
Failure to read an admitted document to the accused prejudices fair trial, warranting expungement and quashing of conviction.
Documentary evidence – PF3 – requirement to read admitted document to the accused – irregular admission and expungement – prejudice to fair trial – overriding objective not applicable – conviction quashed; revisional powers (s.4(2) AJA).
|
5 December 2019 |
|
Extension granted where applicant not notified of ruling and opposing counsel who held brief failed to inform.
Civil procedure — Extension of time to file Reference — Application under court rules — Requirement to show "good cause" — Notice of delivery of ruling — Effect of advocate "holding brief" and duty to inform fellow advocate — Evidence required to substantiate knowledge of delivery of ruling.
|
3 December 2019 |
|
High Court lacked jurisdiction to grant extension after appeal transferred to subordinate court with extended jurisdiction; its proceedings were quashed.
Appellate jurisdiction — transfer under s.45(2) MCA — effect of transfer; Extension of time — s.11(1) AJA — subordinate court with extended jurisdiction has exclusive power to extend time after transfer; Jurisdiction — High Court lacks jurisdiction once appeal transferred; Revision — s.4(2) AJA to quash null proceedings.
|
3 December 2019 |
|
High Court lacked jurisdiction to grant extension after appeal was transferred to a subordinate court with extended jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction — Transfer under section 45(2) MCA — Appeal heard by subordinate court with extended jurisdiction — Section 11(1) AJA grants power to extend time to the subordinate court in such cases — High Court lacked jurisdiction — Proceedings nullity — Revisional powers under section 4(2) AJA to quash and set aside.
|
3 December 2019 |
|
Failure to sum up vital legal points to assessors vitiated the trial; proceedings quashed and retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure – trials before High Court with assessors – duty to sum up to assessors on both facts and all vital points of law – failure to direct assessors on vital legal issues (retracted confession, identification, alibi, malice aforethought, common intention, burden of proof) vitiates proceedings – defect not curable under section 388 CPA or overriding objective – retrial ordered.
|
2 December 2019 |
|
Failure to sum up vital points of law to assessors vitiates the trial and mandates quashing and retrial.
Criminal procedure – trials before High Court with assessors – necessity to sum up to assessors on both facts and all vital points of law – failure to do so vitiates proceedings; incurable by s.388 CPA or overriding objective – retrial ordered.
|
2 December 2019 |
| November 2019 |
|
|
Failure to sum up to assessors on vital legal issues vitiated the trial; retrial before a different judge and assessors ordered.
Criminal procedure – trials with assessors – duty of trial judges to sum up to assessors on facts and all vital points of law; failure to do so vitiates proceedings; retracted confessions, identification, alibi, malice aforethought and common intention are vital legal issues requiring direction to assessors; defect not curable under section 388 CPA or overriding objective; retrial ordered under section 4(2) AJA.
|
29 November 2019 |
|
Applicant’s extension applications were incompetent and time‑barred; Court struck the application out with costs.
* Civil procedure — Extension of time — Application to Court of Appeal for enlargement of time to lodge notice of appeal and to apply for certificate on a point of law — Requirement to first apply to High Court (Rule 47; s.11 AJA) — Time limit to approach Court of Appeal within 14 days after High Court refusal (Rule 45A(1)(c)).
|
28 November 2019 |
|
Criminal prosecution for alleged trespass in disputed land is premature; trial proceedings must be nullified and land dispute resolved in civil court.
* Criminal procedure – premature criminal prosecution where ownership or boundary of land is disputed – such disputes must be resolved in civil proceedings before criminal charges for trespass/encroachment are pursued.
* Appeal procedure – consequence of finding criminal proceedings premature: nullification of trial proceedings and referral of land dispute to competent civil forum.
* Forfeiture law – confiscation/forfeiture linked to conviction is discharged when conviction is quashed; restitution of seized property appropriate.
* Procedural conduct – voluntary withdrawal of prosecution counsel does not make an appeal hearing "ex parte"; counsel conduct in court must adhere to professional duties.
|
7 November 2019 |
|
Conviction quashed for unsafe visual identification and improperly admitted deceased's statement under section 34B(2).
Criminal law – visual identification – need for details on lighting and area illuminated; risk of mistaken identification; Evidence Act s.34B(2) – requirements for tendering statements of absent/deceased persons (service of copy and opportunity to object); second appeal – interference where lower courts misapprehend evidence causing miscarriage of justice.
|
6 November 2019 |
|
|
6 November 2019 |
|
Notice of appeal need not precede an extension application; court may grant time to address apparent illegality.
Criminal procedure – extension of time to appeal – notice of appeal not a prerequisite to applying for extension – requirement to show good/sufficient cause – re‑composed judgment raising apparent illegality – Court of Appeal’s discretion to grant extension in exceptional circumstances.
|
6 November 2019 |
|
Apparent illegality on the trial record can justify extension of time to appeal despite long delay.
Criminal procedure — Extension of time under section 361(2) CPA — Inordinate delay vs. apparent illegality on the face of the record; Non-compliance with sections 230 and 231 CPA — no-case-to-answer ruling and explanation of right to make a defence; Court of Appeal power to substitute High Court discretion to secure justice.
|
6 November 2019 |
|
Filing a notice of appeal is not prerequisite to seeking extension of time; re‑composed judgment raised apparent illegality.
* Criminal procedure – extension of time to appeal – filing a notice of appeal is not a prerequisite to applying for extension – applicant must show good/sufficient cause for delay; * Re‑composed judgment – potential illegality and functus officio – Court of Appeal entitled to grant extension in exceptional circumstances to enable appellate scrutiny.
|
5 November 2019 |
|
Misdirection and pre-determination at summing up, plus other procedural defects, vitiated the trial; retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure – duty to read and explain documentary exhibits to accused – inadmissible reliance on cautioned statements not tendered – summing up to assessors – prohibition on judicial pre-determination of issues and necessity for proper directions on alibi (s.194 C.P.A.) – trial vitiated; retrial ordered.
|
5 November 2019 |
|
Trial vitiated by failure to read exhibits, improper reliance on untendered statements and judge's misdirection influencing assessors on alibi.
Criminal procedure — Duty to read documentary exhibits to accused; inadmissible reliance on uncounselled/tendered statements; assessors — mandatory adequate direction and prohibition on judge pre-determination of issues; alibi — must be considered even if law materially defective; retrial ordered where trial vitiated.
|
5 November 2019 |
|
Convictions based on unreliable night-time visual identification and inadequately identified exhibits were unsafe and quashed.
Criminal law – Visual identification – single eyewitness at night – necessity to describe proximity, source and intensity of light and duration of observation; credibility of identifying witness – contradictions fatal to identification evidence; Identification of exhibits – requirement to describe special/peculiar marks; convictions unsafe where identification of persons and exhibits is insufficient.
|
4 November 2019 |