|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| November 1997 |
|
|
Applicant awarded return or value of hired roller and unpaid hire charges; general damages refused as unnecessary.
* Civil procedure – default by defendant and ex parte proceedings – application under Order VIII r.14 CPC granted where defendant was duly served but failed to appear or file a defence.
* Contract/hire – hired equipment (road roller) – remedy for wrongful detention: claim for return or alternatively payment of value and recovery of unpaid hire charges.
* Damages – general damages not awarded where specific monetary remedy (hire charges/return or value) adequately compensates the plaintiff.
|
10 November 1997 |
|
An appeal filed after the statutory 90‑day period is legally incompetent and was struck out by the court.
Limitation of actions – Appeals – statutory 90‑day filing period under Law of Limitation Act No.10/1971 – appeal filed out of time renders appeal legally incompetent and deprives court of jurisdiction – appeal struck out; no order as to costs (heard ex parte).
|
3 November 1997 |
| October 1997 |
|
|
Applicant's alteration of company objects confirmed; statutory notice to debenture holders dispensed under Companies Ordinance.
* Companies Ordinance (Cap. 212) – s.7 – alteration of company objects – confirmation of special resolution; * Companies Ordinance – s.7(3) proviso – dispensation of notice to debenture holders and interested persons; * Requirement that alterations be of the nature permitted by s.7(1)(d); * Ex parte application supported by affidavit evidence.
|
31 October 1997 |
|
Taxing Master properly exercised discretion to tax costs reasonably despite absence of vouchers; reference dismissed.
Taxation of costs – Taxing Master’s discretion under G.N. No. 515/1991 (Rule 11) – application of Rule 55(1) (receipts/vouchers) read with Rule 11 – absence of vouchers does not alone prove falsity – taxation at flat rates reasonable where particulars lacking – execution/bailiff’s fees not determined in improper reference/sub judice.
|
30 October 1997 |
|
High Court quashed nullified primary and appellate proceedings where rehearing and fresh evidence were improperly handled in an administration application.
• Civil procedure – administration of estates – appointment of administrator – proper procedure for receiving evidence and delivering a ruling.
• Appeal – appellate court considering fresh evidence not forming basis of trial court’s order – nullity of proceedings.
• Succession law – distinction between appointment of administrator and determination of inheritance/ownership claims – improper conversion of administration application into an inheritance suit.
|
29 October 1997 |
|
|
15 October 1997 |
| September 1997 |
|
|
|
30 September 1997 |
| August 1997 |
|
|
The appellant's appeal allowed: the respondent's land claim was time-barred and void for non-joinder and uncertain award.
* Land law – trespass – remedy must be certain and implementable – court must identify and demarcate land awarded.
* Civil procedure – non-joinder of necessary parties – failure to join persons who will be dispossessed renders judgment voidable and breaches audi alteram partem.
* Limitation – statutory 12-year period (G.N. No.311/1964) – action time-barred; court requires credible evidence to excuse delay and an application for extension.
* Equity – equitable relief cannot succeed where preliminary legal defects (limitation, non-joinder) remain unaddressed.
|
29 August 1997 |
|
Leave to appeal granted where Rule 8 extension application cured procedural non-compliance; preliminary objections held premature.
* Appellate procedure – leave to appeal from High Court to Court of Appeal – requirement for certification of points of law. * Court of Appeal Rules – Rules 77 and 83 (service of notice, application for proceedings, lodging appeal documents) – non-compliance and competence of appeal. * Rule 8 – extension of time to perform acts required by other rules and curing procedural omissions. * Procedural objections – prematurity of raising compliance objections in High Court when extension application is pending in Court of Appeal.
|
13 August 1997 |
| July 1997 |
|
|
A member of a different clan cannot inherit clan land despite long possession; appeal dismissed with costs.
Customary land law – Clan land ownership and patriarchal inheritance – Whether a member of a different clan may inherit clan land; Possession and acquisition of title by long uninterrupted occupation; Civil procedure – challenge to appeal validity for non-payment of filing fees vs. filing by ERV.
|
25 July 1997 |
|
Clan land under patriarchal inheritance cannot be claimed by a member of a different clan; appeal dismissed with costs.
Land law – Clan land and inheritance – Patriarchal clan ownership – Whether a member of another clan can inherit clan land – Long possession and acquisition of title – Procedural objection to filing fees.
|
25 July 1997 |
Civil Practice and Procedure - Appeals - Duty of appellate court where there is no judgment |
21 July 1997 |
|
Conviction for stealing by servant quashed for lack of independent corroboration and insufficient proof beyond reasonable doubt.
* Criminal law – stealing by servant – proof beyond reasonable doubt required. * Corroboration – independent evidence required to implicate accused; credibility/demeanour alone insufficient. * Inference from delay in reporting – caution against treating delay as conclusive evidence of guilt. * Reasonable doubt where multiple plausible explanations exist.
|
15 July 1997 |
| June 1997 |
|
|
Appellate court substituted a conviction for acquittal, finding the respondent guilty of dangerous driving on credible evidence.
* Road Traffic Act – causing accident by dangerous driving (s.40(1)(a)) – proof beyond reasonable doubt – credibility of eyewitness evidence and weight of circumstantial physical evidence.
* Criminal appeal – appellate substitution of conviction for trial acquittal where evidence establishes guilt.
* Evidence – absence of physical debris at scene and post-accident conduct (removal/concealment) relevant to credibility and inference of guilt.
|
19 June 1997 |
Civil Practice and Procedure - Court- Jurisdiction - Resident magistrate - Deserving cases may be filed in the the court of the resident magistrate |
17 June 1997 |
|
Appeal dismissed on grounds that an unstamped agreement is inadmissible and fresh evidence cannot be introduced on appeal; vendor ordered to repay advance plus costs.
* Stamp Duty Act – unstamped written agreement inadmissible under section 46.
* Civil procedure – judgment on admission – appellant estopped from introducing fresh evidence on appeal.
* Appeal – improper reopening of trial via new defences; appellate court properly dismissed such appeal.
* Remedies – vendor revocation requires repayment of advance and compensation for reasonable costs; additional damages require proof in separate suit.
|
16 June 1997 |
|
Appeal improper where it seeks to introduce fresh evidence; unstamped written agreement inadmissible; vendor ordered to refund advance plus agreed costs.
* Civil procedure – appeal – inadmissibility of raising fresh evidence and defences on appeal; appeals are not for reopening trials. * Evidence – stamp duty – written agreement not duly stamped is inadmissible under the Stamp Duty Act. * Contract – vendor’s revocation clause – revocation permissible if vendee’s costs/damages are paid but such damages require evidential proof. * Remedy – refund of advance and agreed reasonable costs; further claims to be pursued in separate suit.
|
16 June 1997 |
Civil Practice and Procedure — Fresh proceedings - Institution in violation of Order 23 Rule 1(3) - Employment cause - Whether such constitutes a suit for purposes of Order |
10 June 1997 |
|
Missing forensic reports and insufficient circumstantial evidence created reasonable doubt, resulting in the accused's acquittal for murder.
* Criminal law – Circumstantial evidence – Requirement that circumstantial facts collectively exclude reasonable doubt and point to guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
* Evidence – Forensic reports and exhibits – Failure to produce handwriting expert report, chemist report, and crucial exhibit (pesticide bottle) may materially weaken prosecution case.
* Criminal procedure – Alibi – Presence of an alibi and evidential gaps can give rise to reasonable doubt.
|
5 June 1997 |
| May 1997 |
|
|
An execution order based on an unproved government valuation report is a nullity; the valuation must be proved and tested in court.
* Civil procedure – execution of judgment – admissibility of valuation report – requirement that valuation report be proved by its maker and maker be available for examination and cross‑examination when correctness is challenged.
* Evidence – documentary expert reports – written valuation not admissible merely as business entry; maker must give evidence when objected to.
* Procedural fairness – court’s duty to safeguard fairness even where a party defaults; failure to afford an opportunity to test expert evidence is a miscarriage of justice.
|
26 May 1997 |
|
Extension of time refused where the applicant failed to prosecute appeal and respondent’s long possession made relief futile.
* Civil procedure — Extension of time — Application properly struck off where applicant failed to prosecute appeal and took no steps to reinstate or challenge dismissal.
* Appeals — Want of prosecution — Failure to prosecute a pending appeal bars subsequent equitable relief to extend time for revision.
* Land law — Long uninterrupted possession — Extended adverse possession/long possession may confer rights making dispossession futile.
|
22 May 1997 |
| March 1997 |
|
|
Procedural irregularities (photocopy plaint, wrong file numbers) rendered subordinate court proceedings null, so judgment was quashed.
Civil procedure – subordinate court irregularities – photocopy plaint and missing original – inconsistent case numbers and fee receipts – proceedings nullity; computation of appeal limitation period from certified record; quashing of proceedings and judgment; right to refile subject to limitation.
|
19 March 1997 |
| January 1997 |
|
|
Appellate court quashed rape conviction because evidence proved assault causing actual bodily harm but not rape; substitution for non-cognate offence not permitted.
Criminal law – rape – sufficiency of evidence; assault causing actual bodily harm – proof and common intention; alibi – evidential effect when unsupported; alternative verdicts – inability to substitute non-cognate offence conviction under CPA sections 300–308.
|
20 January 1997 |
|
The appellant's rape conviction was quashed for insufficient evidence; substitution to a non‑cognate lesser offence was not allowed.
* Criminal law – Rape – sufficiency of evidence and corroboration of complainant’s account. * Evidence – identification – reliability of witness identification in poor conditions and when witness was attacked. * Medical evidence – interpretation of PF3 findings and absence of explicit genital injury or spermatozoa. * Defence – alibi where supporting witness fails to appear. * Criminal Procedure Act (ss.300–308) – alternative verdicts and substitution not permitted where lesser offence is not cognate.
|
20 January 1997 |
|
District Commissioner’s revocation and reallocation without presidential fiat was unlawful and subject to quashing.
Land law – administrative revocation and re-allocation of land – District Commissioner’s power – requirement of Presidential fiat under Land Ordinance – legality of administrative acts considered by courts suo motu; Limitation – effect of promised compensation; Adverse possession/equitable title – protection for long-term occupants and effect of Operation Vijiji allocations.
|
1 January 1997 |
|
A default judgment can be res judicata, but the applicant's present claim involved different issues and is not barred.
Civil procedure — Res judicata (S.9 CPC) — Whether a default judgment under Order VIII r.14(1) is a decision on the merits — Comparison of "directly and substantially in issue" between prior counter-claim and present suit — Distinct claims for return/value of specific machinery versus hiring/management and storage charges.
|
1 January 1997 |
|
Court taxed bill of costs at shs 438,650/= (shs 157,000/= disallowed); loss of income claim struck out; several items reduced or struck out.
Costs — Taxation of bill of costs — Reasonableness of instruction fees and travel/attendance allowances — Application of GN 515/91 limits on advocates' remuneration — Necessity of receipts/evidence — Loss of income cannot be claimed in taxation proceedings, requires separate civil suit.
|
1 January 1997 |