|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| October 2006 |
|
|
Procedural failures and unreliable identification rendered the rape conviction unsafe; appeal allowed and conviction quashed.
Criminal procedure – failure to hold mandatory preliminary hearing (s192 CPA); Evidence – child witness of tender age requires voire dire (s127 Evidence Act); Sexual offences – evidence to be taken in camera (s186(3) CPA; Children and Young Persons Act); Identification – improper identification parade and unreliable identification; Conviction unsafe where procedural breaches and evidential gaps exist.
|
20 October 2006 |
|
Court struck out amended petition paragraphs that introduced new cause of action and omitted material particulars as ordered.
* Election law – amendment of election petition – permissibility of introducing new causes of action; * Pleadings – Order 6 Rules 4 & 5 Civil Procedure Code and Rule 26 Election Petition Rules – requirement to plead material facts (names, affiliations, agent particulars) as further and better particulars; * Preliminary objections – striking out offending paragraphs for non‑compliance with court-ordered particulars.
|
19 October 2006 |
|
Identification was reliable; conviction upgraded from stealing to robbery and sentence reduced to 15 years.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – Visual identification at night where victims knew accused and lighting available – Waziri Amini principle; Criminal law – Elements of robbery where weapons used to threaten during theft – misdirection in convicting only of stealing; Sentencing – appellate reduction of excessive sentence.
|
19 October 2006 |
|
A first appellate court must decide appeals on the merits and may not improperly refer land disputes to a Land Tribunal.
Civil appeal — appellate duty to rehear — first appellate court must re-evaluate evidence and decide appeals on merits; Jurisdiction — improper referral to Regional Customary Land Tribunal; Land law — proof of ownership/right of occupancy on balance of probabilities; Evidence — admissibility and probative value of handwritten letters, photocopied minutes and secondary documents; Hearsay — inadmissible evidence; Failure to call a witness — no injustice where party declines witness and bias is apparent.
|
19 October 2006 |
|
|
19 October 2006 |
|
Conviction for store-breaking upheld on strong identification and possession evidence; mistaken statutory citation held curable.
* Criminal law – Store-breaking (s.296(1) Penal Code) – identification and possession of stolen property; empty bags marked with complainant’s initials as corroborative evidence.
* Evidence – ocular identification and subsequent discovery of marked property – sufficiency to prove guilt.
* Procedure – erroneous citation of Penal Code provision (s.265) – curable under s.388 Criminal Procedure Act where no prejudice shown.
* Appeal – appellate court will not disturb trial court findings where evidence is strong and credible.
|
18 October 2006 |
|
Documentary admissions proved conversion of timber; coerced-admission claim unproven and appeal dismissed with costs.
* Civil law – conversion/appropriation – sufficiency of evidence to prove conversion of goods – documentary admissions as proof. * Evidence – admissibility and credibility of documents appended to pleadings; expunction of documents not exhibited. * Evidence – alleged confessions/coerced admissions – requirement of proof before excluding admissions. * Appeal – appellate review of trial court’s evaluation of documentary evidence and findings of fact.
|
18 October 2006 |
|
Appeal against armed robbery conviction dismissed; medical and corroborative evidence upheld despite non-production of weapon.
* Criminal law – Armed robbery – Whether conviction may rest on single-witness testimony – need for corroboration. * Evidence – Medical evidence (PF3) corroborating wounds caused by a sharp instrument. * Evidence – Non-production of weapon not necessarily fatal where other evidence supports use of a sharp instrument. * Evidence – Testimony of family members not automatically requiring corroboration. * Procedure – Alibi and requirement of notice under section 194(4) Criminal Procedure Act.
|
18 October 2006 |
|
Conviction for armed robbery upheld where medical and eyewitness evidence corroborated despite absence of weapon and family witnesses.
* Criminal law – Armed robbery (ss. 285, 286 Penal Code) – conviction sustained where eyewitness testimony and medical report (PF3) establish robbery and wounds by a sharp object. * Evidence – Single witness/corroboration – corroboration may be provided by another eyewitness and circumstances; family relationship of witnesses does not automatically invalidate testimony. * Evidence – Non-production of alleged weapon not fatal where medical and testimonial evidence show use of a sharp instrument. * Criminal procedure – Alibi notice – failure to give notice under s.194(4) and to call supporting witnesses may justify rejection of alibi.
|
18 October 2006 |
|
|
18 October 2006 |
|
Application filed out of time without leave was struck out; appeal dismissed for want of prosecution.
* Civil procedure – Extension of time – need to show sufficient reasons for delay – misplacement of file and clerical error not sufficient. * Procedural competence – application filed out of time without leave is incompetent and liable to be struck out. * Dismissal for want of prosecution – repeated non‑compliance with court orders and lack of diligence justify dismissal and costs.
|
18 October 2006 |
|
An inordinate four‑year delay caused by applicant's negligence does not justify extension of time to seek leave to appeal.
Civil procedure — extension of time (rule 8) — application for leave to appeal out of time (rule 43(b)) — inordinate delay — negligence/lack of diligence not sufficient reason — prior authorities applied.
|
17 October 2006 |
|
A supplementary affidavit cannot amend a chamber summons or cure a mis-citation; application struck out as incompetent.
Civil procedure – amendment of pleadings; supplementary affidavit cannot amend Chamber Summons or cure mis-citation; affidavit content – no prayers or legal argument; application competence; extension of time applications.
|
12 October 2006 |
|
Proceedings in a Resident Magistrate's Court presided over by a District Magistrate are a nullity for want of jurisdiction.
Magistrates' Courts Act s.6(1)(c) – constitution of Resident Magistrate's Court – jurisdiction – proceedings and judgment nullity where non-resident (District) Magistrate presides – appellate consequence; estoppel finding unnecessary where jurisdictional defect exists.
|
10 October 2006 |
|
Appellate court increased damages for a child injured in a motor accident, finding the trial award manifestly inadequate.
* Motor-vehicle accidents – quantum of damages – appellate interference with trial court assessment of damages when award is manifestly inadequate.
* Civil damages for personal injury – consideration of permanent effects (headaches, diminished school performance) in assessing general damages.
* Appellate review – principles from Davies v Powell; Mint v Lovell – interference only where wrong principle, misapprehension of facts, or wholly erroneous estimate.
* Traffic offences – criminal sentences and fines not varied on appeal in this case.
|
10 October 2006 |
|
Court acquitted accused of murder for insufficient prosecution evidence, citing careless investigation and inadmissible/delayed witness statements.
Criminal law – murder – sufficiency of evidence; no case to answer where prosecution evidence fails to connect accused; suspicion insufficient for conviction; delayed and irregularly recorded witness statements; inadmissibility of improperly recorded statements; negligent investigation and court's admonition to police and prosecutors.
|
9 October 2006 |
|
Application for stay of execution pending appeal refused because District Court had entrusted estate assets to Village Executive Officer, rendering stay futile.
Civil procedure – Stay of execution pending appeal – Power under Magistrates' Courts Act s.32(1)(a)(ii) – When stay would be futile – Estate administration – assets placed in custody of Village Executive Officer – intermeddling and executor de son tort.
|
6 October 2006 |
|
Court refused stay of execution pending appeal from Primary Court, holding inherent powers require evidence of real risk of dissipation.
* Civil procedure – Stay of execution – Appeals from Primary Courts – absence of statutory provision – inherent jurisdiction to grant stay in interest of justice. * Stay of execution – Test: whether judgment will be rendered nugatory by dissipation of subject matter. * Requirement of evidence demonstrating real risk of disposal before grant of injunctive relief.
|
6 October 2006 |
|
Certiorari leave to quash prospecting licences refused because a statutory appeal existed and was not shown inadequate.
* Administrative law – prerogative remedies – certiorari – leave stage requires arguable case, timeliness and sufficient interest. * Mining law – statutory appeal under Mining Act (s.103) as alternative remedy to judicial review. * Judicial discretion – existence of appeal does not automatically bar certiorari; relief refused where appeal is adequate and effective.
|
6 October 2006 |
|
Insulting words unlikely to incite physical violence do not constitute an offence under section 89(1)(b).
Criminal law – Threats and incitement – Section 89(1)(b) Penal Code – Requirement of likelihood to provoke physical violence; mere insulting or offensive words causing annoyance are insufficient for breach of the peace.
|
5 October 2006 |
|
|
5 October 2006 |
|
Extension of time to appeal granted where sickness and an arguable point of law justified the delay.
Appellate procedure – extension of time to appeal – sufficient cause – sickness supported by medical evidence; presence of arguable point of law; prospects of success; refusal would deny justice; intended issue on land ownership rights in refugee-reserved area.
|
5 October 2006 |
|
Conviction unsafe where nighttime visual identification was unreliable and the accused missed the identification parade.
* Criminal law — Identification evidence — reliability of visual identification at night; application of Waziri Amani principles; failure to include accused at identification parade; insufficiency of uncorroborated eyewitness identification; suspicion alone inadequate for conviction.
|
4 October 2006 |
|
An unequivocal guilty plea bars appeal under section 360(1); unproven delay by prison authorities does not justify extension.
Criminal procedure – extension of time to appeal – plea of guilty – section 360(1) Criminal Procedure Act bars appeals after unequivocal guilty plea – alleged delay by prison authorities must be substantiated – failure to provide interpreter, if not raised at trial, is an afterthought.
|
4 October 2006 |
|
Extension to appeal refused where accused pleaded guilty and alleged delay and non‑interpretation were unsupported.
Criminal procedure — Extension of time to file notice of intention to appeal — Guilty plea — Section 360(1) Criminal Procedure Act — Bar to appeal after guilty plea — Alleged delay caused by prison authorities requires evidential support — Alleged lack of interpretation must be shown on record.
|
4 October 2006 |
|
An unopposed, affidavit-supported application for enlargement of time to appeal was granted by the court.
Criminal procedure – extension of time to appeal – unopposed application – supporting affidavit establishing reasons for delay – court may grant extension.
|
4 October 2006 |
|
Owner entitled to interlocutory immobilization and possession of locomotives pending suit, subject to conditions and bank guarantee.
Civil procedure – interlocutory injunctions: requirements (prima facie case, irreparable injury, inadequacy of damages, balance of convenience); proprietary rights – owner’s right to possession; effect of foreign proceedings/arbitration on provisional relief; public interest considerations.
|
4 October 2006 |
|
Owner entitled to conditional interim repossession of locomotives pending suit, on prima facie, irreparable injury and balance of convenience grounds.
Commercial injunctions – repossession of leased rolling stock – prima facie case, irreparable injury and balance of convenience – effect of parallel foreign proceedings and public interest – conditional interim relief.
|
4 October 2006 |
|
Extension of time granted where appeal documents were misplaced by a court clerk and the appeal was struck out.
Extension of time – Law of Limitation Act s.14 – sufficient cause – misplaced court documents – appeal struck out for procedural defect – discretionary enlargement granted; applicant ordered to lodge appeal within one month; costs each to bear own.
|
3 October 2006 |
|
District Court misapplied summary-procedure and entered an improper ex parte judgment; proceedings declared a nullity.
* Civil procedure — Order 35 (Order XXXV) summary procedure — requirements for leave to defend and scope of summary suits.
* Civil procedure — Distinction between summons to appear and summons to file a defence in subordinate courts.
* Judgment — Validity of ex parte/summary judgment where improper procedure was used — proceedings declared nullity.
|
3 October 2006 |
|
District Court misapplied Order 35 summary procedure; ex parte judgment entered on wrong process declared a nullity.
Civil procedure — Order XXXV (summary procedure) — requirement of chamber application and affidavits for leave to defend — distinction between summons to appear and summons to file defence — improper use of summary procedure — ex parte judgment declared nullity.
|
3 October 2006 |
|
|
3 October 2006 |
|
Leave to file a criminal appeal out of time granted based on applicants’ affidavits and absence of opposition.
* Criminal procedure – application for leave to file appeal out of time – supporting affidavits – respondent not opposing application – court grants leave.
|
2 October 2006 |
| September 2006 |
|
|
|
29 September 2006 |
|
Conviction quashed where trial court failed to evaluate defence and no forensic link tied the appellant to the semen.
* Criminal law – Rape – Proof beyond reasonable doubt – Distinction between proof of sexual intercourse and proof of identity of perpetrator. * Criminal procedure – Evaluation of evidence – Trial court must assess defence evidence together with prosecution case. * Forensic evidence – Presence of spermatozoa without DNA linkage insufficient to identify accused. * Appeal – Conviction quashed where reasonable doubt as to who committed the offence.
|
29 September 2006 |
|
Post Office negligently paid money to the wrong person; appellants were not negligent; appeal allowed with costs.
Postal money orders — duty of Post Office to verify recipient identity — negligence in payment to wrong person — use of third-party PO Box not automatically negligent — appellate intervention where trial magistrate wrongly imputes contributory negligence to sender.
|
29 September 2006 |
|
|
28 September 2006 |
|
Court upholds trial court finding of mistaken identity and orders immediate release from unlawful detention.
Criminal procedure – conviction in absentia; mistaken identity – inquiry and additional evidence to determine identity; restoration after striking out – court not functus officio; s.361(1) notice of appeal – procedural timeliness vs. liberty; factual findings on credibility – appellate restraint.
|
27 September 2006 |
|
Court ordered immediate release after finding appellant was mistakenly identified as the convicted person and unlawfully imprisoned.
Criminal law – Identity of accused – Inquiry into identity after conviction in absentia; Criminal procedure – Effect of striking out appeal; Section 361(1) notice of intention to appeal – competence; Functus officio – restoration of struck out matters; Appellate review – deference to trial court credibility findings.
|
27 September 2006 |
|
Court ordered immediate release after inquiry found detainee was not the person convicted in absentia; trial-court credibility findings upheld.
Criminal procedure – identity of convicted person – inquiry into identity after conviction in absentia – deference to trial court’s credibility findings; striking-out appeal and court’s power to restore; s.361(1) notice of intention to appeal – time limits vis-à-vis personal liberty.
|
27 September 2006 |
|
Applicant failed to show sufficient cause or supporting evidence for enlargement of time to file a criminal appeal.
* Criminal procedure – extension of time – applicant must show sufficient cause for late filing under s.361(1) Criminal Procedure Act; * Prisoner delay excuses – allegations that prison authorities caused delay should be supported by affidavit from prison in‑charge; * Procedural discretion – court may dismiss unexplained long delays; * Merits of intended appeal not determinant when deciding enlargement of time.
|
27 September 2006 |
|
Applicant failed to show sufficient cause for delay; unexplained ten‑month delay and no prison affidavit led to dismissal.
Criminal procedure – extension of time to file notice of appeal – sufficient cause required – delay attributed to prison authorities must be supported by affidavit from prison In‑charge – unexplained long delay negates diligence – merits not assessed at extension stage.
|
27 September 2006 |
|
|
27 September 2006 |
|
Conviction overturned where identification of common stolen items was inadequate and possession explanation raised reasonable doubt.
Criminal law — Theft/store breaking — Identification of stolen goods — Common articles require special descriptive identification or marks; bare ownership claims insufficient; recent possession insufficient where accused gives plausible explanation; conviction overturned for failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Also: procedural irregularity leading to unintended conviction of an acquitted accused — release ordered.
|
27 September 2006 |
|
Court granted temporary injunction restraining respondents from transferring or removing factory assets pending trial.
Temporary injunction – application to restrain transfer and registration of industrial assets and removal of machinery pending trial – Atilio v Mbowe principles: serious question to be tried; risk of irreparable injury; balance of convenience – injunction granted.
|
26 September 2006 |
|
Amendments to election petitions may only add particulars of pleaded facts; new causes of action are impermissible and were struck out.
Election petitions — amendments — scope of permissible amendments: only further and better particulars of material facts already pleaded; new facts or new causes of action cannot be introduced by amendment — must not circumvent limitation or cause injustice — preliminary objection upheld to strike out impermissible paragraphs; particulars supporting scrutiny retained.
|
26 September 2006 |
|
Court upheld custody order prioritising children’s welfare and respondent’s maintenance capacity, dismissing the applicant’s appeal.
Family law – Child custody – Welfare of the child paramount – Age as a relevant factor; parental capacity and maintenance obligations under s.129 Law of Marriage Act; remarriage of mother and single status of father not determinative.
|
25 September 2006 |
|
Court upheld custody allocation prioritising children's welfare and father's capacity to maintain them.
* Family law – custody of children after divorce – welfare of the child paramount; consideration of age and parental capacity. * Parental maintenance – section 129 Law of Marriage Act 1971 – financial ability to provide accommodation, food, clothing and education as factor in custody decisions. * Single parenthood not, per se, a disqualifying factor for custody.
|
25 September 2006 |
|
|
25 September 2006 |
|
Leave to appeal granted on whether the High Court has jurisdiction over suit involving trust properties including land.
Leave to appeal – jurisdiction – whether High Court may entertain suit involving trust properties including land – preliminary objections – adequacy of opportunity to be heard.
|
25 September 2006 |