|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 1988 |
|
|
Appeal dismissed — evidence established appellants broke into a warehouse and stole goods; defence was implausible.
Criminal law – Burglary and theft – Evidence of breaking and stealing; caught red-handed; credibility of defence that visit was innocent; appellate review of magistrate's factual findings.
|
31 December 1988 |
|
Presence in a warehouse with stolen goods and corroborated watchman testimony supports conviction for burglary and theft.
Criminal law – Burglary and theft – Sufficiency of evidence; credibility of accused’s defence; presence with stolen property and watchman’s corroboration – whether convictions sustained beyond reasonable doubt.
|
31 December 1988 |
|
Conviction quashed where recent-possession link was unsupported by evidence of timing or provenance.
* Criminal law – Burglary and stealing – proof beyond reasonable doubt – reliance on possession of property found in accused’s premises.* Criminal law – Recent possession doctrine – requirements for application: clear evidence of timing and connection to the theft charged.* Criminal procedure – Particularity of charge – effect of failing to list recovered item as stolen on the specified date.
|
31 December 1988 |
|
Long continuous occupation after village allocation barred the respondent’s land claim; appeal allowed and Primary Court restored.
* Land law – allocation by village authorities – effect of village development committee allocation on ownership
* Adverse possession/limitation – 24 years' continuous occupation and delay in bringing action
* Evidence – assessment of credibility; appellate restraint in disturbing Primary Court findings supported by consistent witnesses
* Civil procedure – appeal heard in absence of a party; rule 13(3) compliance and service
|
30 December 1988 |
|
Conviction quashed: unsafe to convict on complainant and daughter's uncorroborated testimony; adverse inference warranted.
Criminal law – Theft by agent v. simple theft – conviction safety where evidence rests solely on complainant and close relative; failure to call alleged independent witnesses – adverse inference; no authority to substitute stealing-by-agent conviction with simple theft due to differing penalties.
|
28 December 1988 |
|
A brief admission can constitute an unequivocal guilty plea for simple possession offences; one-year sentence upheld.
Criminal Procedure Act s228(2) – plea of guilty – recording plea in accused’s words – equivocal plea – sufficiency of brief admissions for simple offences – requirement accused understands charge – sentencing proportionality for possession of illicit liquor.
|
28 December 1988 |
|
Eyewitness identification and corroborative testimony sufficiently proved robbery; conviction and sentence affirmed on appeal.
Criminal law – Robbery – Identification and credibility of eyewitness – Sufficiency of evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt – Appellate review of magistrate’s factual findings.
|
28 December 1988 |
|
|
28 December 1988 |
|
Appellate court upheld robbery conviction on reliable identification but quashed the trial court’s order about employer deductions as not properly before it.
* Criminal law – Robbery – Identification evidence – Whether identification at scene and in court was reliable – conviction upheld.
* Criminal procedure – Appeal against conviction – safety of identification as ground of appeal.
* Civil vs criminal jurisdiction – Trial court’s impugned order concerning employer’s deduction of recovered/ missing funds from employee’s salary – matter civil and not properly before criminal court; such order quashed.
|
28 December 1988 |
|
Whether the applicant was properly identified and whether the magistrate imposed an appropriate sentence for armed robbery.
* Criminal law – Identification evidence – Recognition by face and voice – Opportunity to observe and corroboration by dropped item and matching clothing.
* Criminal law – Armed robbery – Elements under sections 285 and 286 Penal Code – Use of violence, weapons and attendant sentencing consequences.
* Sentencing – Limits of subordinate courts, appropriateness of sentence, and committal to High Court for sentencing.
|
28 December 1988 |
|
Identification evidence was adequate; conviction for armed robbery upheld, but sentence noted as unduly lenient and should attract High Court committal.
Criminal law – Armed robbery (Penal Code ss. 285, 286) – Identification evidence – familiarity, voice and clothing corroboration – police corroboration (spent cartridges) – safety of conviction; Sentencing – subordinate court limits, apparent leniency, duty to commit serious robbery cases to High Court for appropriate sentence.
|
28 December 1988 |
|
Whether the evidence—identification and possession of stolen property—sufficiently supported conviction for theft from a motor vehicle.
Criminal law – Theft from a motor vehicle (s.269(b) Penal Code); Appeal against conviction – sufficiency and reliability of identification evidence; Possession/recovery of stolen property and chain of custody; Procedural fairness at trial.
|
27 December 1988 |
|
Appeal dismissed: physical and circumstantial evidence sustained conviction for theft from a train.
Criminal law – theft from a train – whether goods found near railway linked to accused prove theft from train; evidential weight of minor timing inconsistencies; assessment of circumstantial and physical evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
|
27 December 1988 |
|
The appellant's appeal against a stealing conviction was dismissed; police identification and conduct were held sufficient to support the conviction.
* Criminal law – Appeal against conviction – Sufficiency of evidence and eyewitness (police) identification. * Evidence – Found property and chain of custody – police duty and conduct in releasing found items. * Reasonable doubt – alleged police culpability and its effect on conviction.
|
24 December 1988 |
|
Discrepancy in registration plates did not undermine prosecution; admissions and fingerprint evidence sustained conviction for possession of stolen property.
Criminal law – possession of stolen property; proof of knowledge or reason to know; falsified number plates vs. matching engine/chassis and documentary identifiers; evaluation of accused’s admissions and fingerprint evidence; appellate review of alternative conviction.
|
23 December 1988 |
|
Appellants’ convictions upheld on reliable eyewitness identification; recent-possession weak, alibi notice absent, sentence not excessive.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – reliability of eyewitness identification under favourable conditions; Criminal law – Recent possession – inadequacy where stolen items are common and lack distinctive marks; Criminal procedure – Alibi defence – statutory notice requirement and discretionary disregard; Sentencing – whether eight years for robbery with violence is excessive.
|
23 December 1988 |
|
Appellate court substituted imprisonment with higher fines for first-offender assailants and upheld increased compensation.
Criminal law – Assault causing actual bodily harm – Sentencing principles on appeal – appellate court interference only where sentence illegal, manifestly inadequate or excessive – first offenders and avoidance of unnecessary custody – compensation orders and consideration of inflation.
|
23 December 1988 |
|
|
23 December 1988 |
|
Conviction for robbery quashed because identification and corroborative evidence were insufficient; adverse inference unwarranted.
Criminal law – robbery with violence – identification evidence – recent possession doctrine – lack of corroboration (no exhibits, no medical evidence, no eyewitnesses) – delay before arrest – accused’s silence and adverse inference under s.231 Criminal Procedure Act – conviction quashed for insufficient evidence.
|
23 December 1988 |
|
Refusal to hand over money and unspecified insults did not constitute sufficient provocation to excuse or reduce a murder conviction.
Criminal law – Murder – Provocation as partial defence – Provocation must be wrongful act or insult likely to deprive an ordinary person of self‑control; standard to be measured by the accused’s local/community milieu. Evidence – Dying declaration – weight and reliability. Burden of proof – prosecution must disprove accused’s account beyond reasonable doubt.
|
23 December 1988 |
|
Appeal dismissed for failure to attach the certified order required by Order 39 Rule 1.
Civil procedure — Appeal — Requirement that memorandum of appeal be accompanied by the certified copy of the order appealed against (Order 39 r.1); failure to extract formal order is fatal; document styled "decree" does not substitute for an extracted order; preliminary objections disposing of appeal without deciding competency of original forum.
|
23 December 1988 |
|
Presence at premises alone does not sustain conviction; active possession and attempted sale justify conviction of co-accused.
* Criminal law – breaking and stealing – recovery and possession of stolen property – sufficiency of evidence to convict.
* Circumstantial evidence – presence on premises and ownership/rental of room – limits on inferences.
* Appellate review – whether trial magistrate’s inferences are reasonable and supported by record.
|
21 December 1988 |
|
Appellate court quashed conviction where magistrate relied on extraneous untested matters and summarily refused a transfer, denying a fair trial.
Criminal law – obtaining money by false pretence – credibility of witnesses; Evidence – inadmissible reliance on untested/extraneous information (police detective’s alleged overhearing; stories outside court); Criminal procedure – judge’s duty of impartiality – refusal to transfer trial/recuse without reasons; Fair trial – right to adequate opportunity to cross-examine; Quashing conviction for procedural irregularity.
|
21 December 1988 |
|
Credibility and corroboration upheld conviction for misappropriation of exhibit money despite procedural irregularity.
* Criminal law – Theft of exhibit money – Credibility of accused versus prosecution witnesses – Corroboration by police witnesses – Failure to follow exhibit procedures (failure to enter money in exhibit register) – Appellate review of factual findings and credibility.
|
21 December 1988 |
|
Conviction quashed where identification and proof of theft or knowledge of stolen property were insufficient.
Criminal law – identification of stolen property – adequacy of proof of ownership; recent possession doctrine – limits where identification and witness evidence are equivocal; receiving stolen property (Penal Code s.311) – requires proof of theft and accused's knowledge; failure to call a material witness weakens prosecution case.
|
21 December 1988 |
|
Circumstantial and expert evidence upheld convictions for making and uttering false documents and attempting to obtain money; appeal dismissed.
* Criminal law – Forgery/false instruments – Making and uttering false cheque and payment voucher – proof by circumstantial evidence and handwriting expert.
* Criminal law – Attempt to obtain money by false pretences – steps taken to encash forged cheque constitute attempt.
* Criminal procedure – Investigating officer appearing as prosecutor – permissible where no prejudice shown.
* Sentencing – concurrent sentences lawful and not excessive.
|
21 December 1988 |
|
Conviction for robbery with violence quashed where sole uncorroborated eyewitness identification and supporting evidence were unreliable.
Criminal law – Robbery with violence – Single uncorroborated eyewitness identification – Failure to call police officer who received complaint – Insufficient evidence to convict – Conviction quashed.
|
21 December 1988 |
|
Appellate court quashed conviction due to unsafe identification arising from poor lighting and inconsistent witness accounts.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – Visual identification under torchlight – Contradictory descriptions of clothing – Necessity for certainty to support conviction – Appeal allowed where identification unsafe.
|
21 December 1988 |
|
Appellant’s denial and concealment supported theft conviction; Minimum Sentences Act inapplicable; five-year sentence upheld.
Criminal law – theft by servant; identification of stolen property; concealment and false denial as evidence of guilty knowledge; validity of purported authorization; Minimum Sentences Act – whether owner is a specified authority; sentence review – excessiveness.
|
21 December 1988 |
|
Whether a widow may validly sell immovable property under local customary law; court held she may not, so the sale was void.
* Customary law – inheritance and succession – widow’s rights – widow has usufruct and maintenance rights only; cannot dispose of deceased’s immovable property. * Validity of sale – capacity to dispose – sale by person lacking ownership is null and void. * Civil procedure – appellate review – improper reliance on formalities (stamp duty) where customary law governs local transactions.
|
20 December 1988 |
|
Reported
Plaintiff’s plaint defective but curable — missing averment of driver’s course of employment and lacking proper authority/signature.
Civil procedure – Plaint — requirement to aver employee's course of employment for employer's vicarious liability; power of attorney — distinction between authority to settle and authority to sue; signing pleadings — O. VI r.14 C.P.C.; pre-judgment interest — need to plead basis for commercial rate; curable defects — amendment preferred to rejection under O. VII r.11(a)/Section 95 principles.
|
20 December 1988 |
|
Magistrate had jurisdiction over trespass to unregistered land; malicious prosecution damages upheld; joinder was proper.
Civil procedure — jurisdiction of Magistrate's Court over disputes concerning unregistered/unsurveyed land where issue is trespass; Malicious prosecution — section 86(a) discharge does not necessarily bar civil claim — acquittal and surrounding conduct relevant to malice; Joinder of causes — declaration of ownership and damages for malicious prosecution may properly be joined when arising from same subject matter.
|
20 December 1988 |
|
Reported
Civil Practice and Procedure - Suing - Who may sue - Suing on behalf- Whether a letter authorising a person to settle a claim authorises such person to file a suit.
Civil Practice and Procedure - Plaint - The plaintiff avers that the driver was “authorised to drive a vehicle" - Whether the same as “driving in the course of one's employment" - Whether plaintiff discloses cause of action. |
20 December 1988 |
|
Appeal against sentence for causing grievous harm dismissed; trial court’s sentencing discretion was not improperly exercised.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Appellate interference with discretionary sentences – principles for when an appellate court may vary or overturn a sentence; Criminal law – Causing grievous harm – mitigation, provocation and relationship between parties; Criminal procedure – Whether compensation should be ordered where trial court omitted it.
|
17 December 1988 |
|
Reported
Failure to attach the decree to the memorandum of appeal renders the appeal incompetent and results in dismissal.
Civil procedure – Appeals – Order 39 Rule 1(1) CPC – Mandatory requirement to attach copy of decree to memorandum of appeal – Failure to attach decree renders appeal incompetent – Binding authority cited.
|
17 December 1988 |
|
Failure to attach the decree to the memorandum of appeal renders the applicant's appeal incompetent and leads to dismissal with costs.
Civil Procedure Code, Order 39 Rule 1(1) — memorandum of appeal must be accompanied by copy of decree; failure to comply renders appeal incompetent; court may dismiss appeal; discretion to dispense not exercised.
|
17 December 1988 |
Civil Practice and Procedure - Appeal - Memorandum of appeal not accompanied by a copy decree - Effect - Order 39Rule 1(1) ofthe Civil Procedure Code. Believing that it would take a long time to obtain a copy of a decree, counsel for the appellant filed and presented his memorandum of appeal without a copy of the decree. |
17 December 1988 |
|
Conviction for theft upheld on credible eyewitness testimony; five-year sentence reduced to two years for sentencing procedure errors.
* Criminal law – Theft – conviction on eyewitness evidence – identification by witnesses who knew the accused. * Criminal procedure – Trial in absence – effect on mitigation and sentencing. * Sentencing – previous convictions must be admitted or formally proved in accused’s presence before being taken into account. * Sentencing – requirement for confirmation of sentences exceeding twelve months; appellate reduction for procedural sentencing errors.
|
16 December 1988 |
|
Appeal allowed: inconsistent identification and weak circumstantial evidence meant arson conviction could not be sustained.
Criminal law – Arson – Visual identification at night and varying distances – Inconsistent eyewitness statements – Circumstantial evidence (presence, flight, failure to assist) insufficient where identification not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
|
16 December 1988 |
|
|
16 December 1988 |
|
Appeal dismissed: guilty plea was unequivocal and no exceptional basis existed to call additional evidence on appeal.
* Criminal law – conviction following plea of guilty – requirements for plea to be unequivocal and voluntary; * Immigration law – failure to leave after being declared a prohibited immigrant (Immigration Act s.26(1)(i) and (2)); * Criminal procedure – appellate discretion to call additional evidence (Criminal Procedure Act s.369(1)) – exceptional use only where evidence is relevant, credible, unavailable at trial and capable of raising reasonable doubt.
|
16 December 1988 |
|
Eyewitness identification and corroborative testimony proved the appellant guilty of robbery with violence beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Robbery with violence – Identification of accused – Eyewitness recognition supported by distinctive physical feature and corroborative testimony (lodging-house attendant, police witness) – Totality of evidence sufficient to prove identity and guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
|
16 December 1988 |
|
Appeal from District Court to High Court governed by 90‑day limitation; registrar erred in striking out as time‑barred.
* Civil procedure – appeals from District Court to High Court – applicable limitation period (Law of Limitation Act First Schedule: 90 days). * Interpretation – Magistrates' Courts Act 30-day limit does not apply to appeals from District Courts in original jurisdiction. * Computation of time – period between application for copy of judgment and supply is excluded from time calculation. * Striking out – registrar erred in striking out appeal found not time-barred.
|
15 December 1988 |
|
Conviction for theft was unsafe because the witness who identified recovered property was not properly examined, leaving the prosecution’s case inadequately proved.
* Criminal law – Theft by public servant – Proof required to link recovered property to accused – production of recovered property under Evidence Act s.142 – adequacy of examination of witness identifying property.
* Criminal procedure – Duty of prosecutor and trial court to elicit full evidence from persons producing or identifying recovered property; failure may render conviction unsafe.
* Sentencing – use of Minimum Sentences Act where conviction safety is in issue.
|
14 December 1988 |
|
Appeal allowed where circumstantial evidence failed to exclude other suspects; convictions quashed and sentences set aside.
* Criminal law – Theft (s.265 Penal Code) – sufficiency of circumstantial evidence – handing‑over book and shift procedures – reasonable doubt – benefit of doubt to accused.
|
14 December 1988 |
|
Whether a fresh suit was time‑barred; court held exclusion and ministerial extension made the fresh suit timely.
* Limitation of actions – Law of Limitation Act – computation of limitation period – effect of Minister of Justice’s order extending limitation period – exclusion of time while application for leave to withdraw prior suit pending – fresh suit not statute‑barred.
|
13 December 1988 |
|
Court quashed refusal to appoint an electric inspector and ordered appointment, finding a mandatory duty under the Electricity Ordinance.
Administrative law – judicial review – certiorari and mandamus – refusal to appoint statutorily empowered inspector – ultra vires decision; Electricity law – duties under Electricity Ordinance s.10 and Electricity Rules (rule 45) – consumer right to inspector in disputed disconnection; jurisdiction – exhaustion of statutory appeal not required where appeal provisions inapplicable.
|
13 December 1988 |
|
Appellate court upheld malicious-damage convictions and found nine-month sentences not manifestly excessive.
Criminal law – Malicious damage to property – Evidence of deliberate conduct where accused allowed/cause cattle to destroy maize – Credibility findings of trial court – Sentence proportionality and manifest excessiveness.
|
13 December 1988 |
|
Appellant failed to prove ownership of cattle taken in execution; insufficient corroboration and unproven letter led to dismissal of appeal.
Execution and seizure of property – Ownership of cattle – Sufficiency and weight of oral and documentary evidence – Corroboration required where title is disputed – Letter not probative where signatories not called to testify; appellate review of credibility and findings of fact.
|
12 December 1988 |
|
|
12 December 1988 |