|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2006 |
|
|
Court overruled jurisdictional objection, finding the claim tortious and within this High Court's jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction – Land Disputes Courts Act (Cap. 216 R.E. 2002) – distinction between land title disputes and tortious claims incidental to possession; preliminary objection; temporary injunction; Chief Justice's extension of jurisdiction under s.54(4).
|
14 December 2006 |
|
|
4 December 2006 |
| November 2006 |
|
|
Whether appellants were permanent monthly employees or casual daily-paid workers; court held they were casual.
* Employment law – characterization of employment – whether workers were permanent monthly employees or casual/daily-paid labourers – reliance on signed contracts, attendance registers and payment records. * Evidence – documentary and oral evidence admissibility and weight where exhibits were not objected to. * Labour procedure – adequacy of labour officer's computation of alleged underpayments.
|
24 November 2006 |
|
Plaintiff's suit struck out for being filed in the wrong High Court registry where cause of action arose.
Civil Procedure Code s.18(a),(c) – proper registry/venue – suit to be instituted where defendant resides or cause of action arose; preliminary objection disposing of suit; striking out for wrong registry.
|
13 November 2006 |
|
Suit struck out for being filed in the wrong High Court Registry where the cause of action arose.
Civil procedure — Venue — Suit instituted in wrong High Court Registry — Section 18(a) & (c) Civil Procedure Code — Cause of action arising where defendants reside or carry on business — Suit struck out with costs.
|
13 November 2006 |
|
Administrator’s nine-year failure to file inventory and misapplication of rents justified revocation and appointment of new administrators.
Probate — Revocation of letters of administration; failure to exhibit inventory within statutory time; misapplication/misappropriation of estate rents; suitability of administrator; discretion to refuse extension of time under Probate and Administration Act.
|
13 November 2006 |
|
Failure to file inventory and misappropriation justify revocation of letters of administration and appointment of new administrators.
Probate and Administration – Revocation of letters of administration – Failure to file inventory within statutory time – Misapplication/misappropriation of estate proceeds – Extension of time under Probate and Administration of Estates Act refused – Appointment of joint administrators under the will.
|
13 November 2006 |
| October 2006 |
|
|
Machine failed to meet agreed "super sembe" specification; plaintiff awarded general damages, specific performance, interest and costs.
Sale and supply – defective machinery – failure to meet agreed specifications ("super sembe") – burden of proof for special damages – conversion to general damages and assessment – specific performance (remodeling) and interest.
|
26 October 2006 |
|
Court dismissed certiorari; Board and Minister validly ordered reinstatement and employer risks compensation if it fails to comply.
Labour law – reinstatement orders – jurisdiction and statutory 14‑day referral period; section 24(1)(b) mandatory reinstatement; section 39(2)(k) termination; section 40A compensation; certiorari grounds (jurisdiction, reasons, unreasonableness).
|
26 October 2006 |
|
|
26 October 2006 |
|
Striking out an appeal does not nullify High Court leave; the High Court was functus officio, so the application was dismissed.
Civil procedure – leave to appeal – effect of Court of Appeal striking out an appeal – High Court functus officio on previously granted leave – extension of time – proper forum for seeking leave after striking out.
|
20 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 |
| 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 |
|
|
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 |
|
Extension of time granted where applicant was not notified of judgment, excusing delay in filing appeal notices.
Appellate procedure – extension of time – notice of intention to appeal – leave to appeal – non-notification of judgment – diligence of applicant and counsel – grant of extension.
|
25 September 2006 |
|
Applicant granted extension to appeal where certified court copies were supplied only after appeal period expired.
Extension of time to appeal – Reasonable cause – Late supply of certified copies of judgment, proceedings or drawn order – failure to annex proof of request for copies not necessarily fatal – computation of appeal period.
|
25 September 2006 |
|
Land allocations are governed by land law; failure to develop justified reallocation and appeal was dismissed.
Land law – Allocations by land authorities governed by Land Ordinance not Law of Contract; offers grant rights of occupancy and contain development conditions; failure to develop for extended period justifies withdrawal and reallocation; no entitlement to overturn reallocation for lack of show‑cause notice where non‑development is established.
|
25 September 2006 |
|
|
25 September 2006 |
|
Court granted extension to file for certification after illness-related delay but ignored improperly combined procedural prayers.
Civil procedure – enlargement of time to apply for certification of a point of law – procedural requirement to bring separate applications and to state specific legal provisions – combining multiple remedies in one chamber summons improper – absence due to illness and funeral accepted as sufficient cause – stay and certification prayers ignored for procedural defect.
|
25 September 2006 |
|
The applicant’s land dispute could not be heard by ordinary courts after Oct 2003; lower courts’ proceedings were nullified.
Land law; jurisdiction—effect of Courts (Land Disputes Settlements) Act No.2 of 2002 (G.N. 174/2003); ordinary courts’ loss of jurisdiction over land disputes; nullification of proceedings by courts lacking jurisdiction; requirement of proper appeal from Ward Tribunal when records exist.
|
25 September 2006 |
|
|
12 September 2006 |
|
A spouse’s refusal to testify may be treated as admission; homemaker contributions justify division of matrimonial property.
* Family law – Matrimonial property – Division on divorce – Non‑pecuniary contributions (household duties, childcare) may qualify as contribution to acquisition of assets. * Evidence – Civil burden of proof – A party present who refuses to testify may be treated as admitting the other party’s evidence. * Procedure – Presence and silence of a party do not render proceedings ex parte; court may pronounce judgment where a party refuses to give evidence.
|
11 September 2006 |
Constitutional Law - Interpretation of constitutional provisions - Context of the constitution is essential in interpreting constitutional provisions. Constitutional Law - Basic Rights - Enforcement of basic rights - Whether it is appropriate to seek enforcement of every basic right infringed by petitioning the High Court. The two petitioners were widows. Their uncontroverted depositions showed that by operation of the provisions of certain paragraphs of the Second Schedule to the Local Customary Law (Declaration) (number 4) Order, Chapter 358 RE 2002, their basic rights were infringed, in that they were denied to benefit from the estates oftheir late husbands and to participate in the administration of those estates. They petitioned the High Court praying for a declaration that those paragraphs are unconstitutional and thus null and void, and for an order striking out the paragraphs. Counsel for the respondent conceded that the impugned paragraphs give preferential treatment to men as opposed to women, but counsel contended, however, that other adequate means of redress for the contraventions alleged were available to the petitioners, and should have been exhausted first instead of petitioning the High Court. |
8 September 2006 |
|
|
6 September 2006 |
|
District Court lacked jurisdiction over a non‑small estate; its probate orders were nullity and have been quashed.
Probate and Administration — jurisdiction — 'Court' means High Court (and District Delegate) not District Court — small estate exception (≤ shs.10,000/=) — District Court orders in non-small estate null and void — quash and set aside.
|
1 September 2006 |
| August 2006 |
|
|
Non-compliant, substantively empty written submissions were struck out for failing to follow the court’s directions.
Civil procedure – Appeal – non-appearance of respondents despite notice – order to argue appeal by written submissions – failure to comply – striking out substantively empty and non-compliant written submissions – costs each party to bear.
|
30 August 2006 |
|
Appeal dismissed: trial court had jurisdiction, unstamped loan documents improperly admitted but independent evidence proved loan.
* Jurisdiction – loan dispute secured by land – security does not convert loan dispute into land dispute; trial court retained jurisdiction. * Evidence – unstamped documents (stamp duty) improperly admitted if not objected to at trial; appellate challenge to admissibility improper if not raised as preliminary objection. * Evidence – corroboration by independent witness can cure evidential defects and support existence of contract/loan. * Appellate review – trial court’s credibility findings and evaluation of evidence entitled to deference. * Remedy – appeal dismissed with costs.
|
23 August 2006 |
|
A 3% instruction fee on a large claimed sum was excessive where the suit was disposed on a preliminary objection.
Advocates' costs – Taxation of instruction to defend – Whether a percentage of monetary claim (3%) is justified where suit struck out on preliminary objection; Taxing officer's discretion under Schedule IX of Advocates Remuneration and Taxation of Costs Rules; Reasonableness and proportionality of instruction fees for unliquidated claims.
|
23 August 2006 |
|
Final judgment deferred and matter remitted for further s.29 evidence to resolve disputed estate distribution and ownership.
* Succession and family property – dispute over ownership of family house as part of deceased's estate – uncertainty as to distribution of proceeds from other estate properties.
* Evidence – insufficiency of record and death of key administrator necessitating further evidence – remittal under s.29 Magistrates' Court Act, 1964.
* Civil procedure – appeal requiring factual supplementation from subordinate court before final determination.
|
18 August 2006 |
|
Recent possession of marked stolen currency, absent a plausible alibi, can irresistibly infer participation in burglary.
Criminal law – Burglary and theft – recent possession of stolen property (marked/ burnt currency) as circumstantial evidence; requirement to give notice/particulars of alibi under section 194 Criminal Procedure Act; appellate review where trial judgment lacks analysis.
|
17 August 2006 |
|
Prosecution failed to prove police officers guilty of murder; co‑accused statements and circumstantial/forensic links were insufficient.
Criminal law – murder prosecution of police officers; participation and common intention (ss.22–23 Penal Code); confessions and co‑accused statements — express vs implied confessions (s.3(1) Evidence Act); s.33(1) Evidence Act applicability; evidential value of forensic (ballistics, blood) evidence; accessory after the fact not a permissible substituted conviction where principal not proved.
|
17 August 2006 |
|
Missing jurat particulars and absence of representative leave made the application incurably defective and thus struck out.
Notaries Public and Commissioners for Oaths (Cap 12) s.8 – jurat must truly state place and date; affidavit omission incurably defective; stamp does not cure. Civil Procedure Code Order 1 Rule 8 – representative suits/applications: mandatory court permission required for one or more to represent numerous persons; failure to obtain leave renders proceedings incompetent.
|
4 August 2006 |
|
Court quashed judgment where magistrate ignored preliminary objections; separate appeal dismissed as court was functus officio.
Civil procedure – preliminary objections – duty to deliver a ruling on preliminary points and consider written submissions; illegality of entering judgment on pleadings alone. Civil procedure – execution of decrees – functus officio where earlier court has conclusively recognised settlement adjusting decretal sum; subsequent magistrate cannot reopen settled matters.
|
4 August 2006 |
| July 2006 |
|
|
|
27 July 2006 |
|
Revision application struck out for relying on wrong and non‑existent statutory provisions.
Magistrates Courts Act — Correct statutory basis for High Court revision; section 30 relates to Primary Courts; incorrect or non‑existent citations (s30(1)(c), s44(a)) render application improperly brought; requirement to specify enabling provisions; alternative remedy (appeal) noted.
|
24 July 2006 |
|
A secret sale of estate property already assigned to a child was unlawful; appellant must restore possession to the respondent.
Land law – administration of estate – distribution of estate property to minor beneficiary – validity of subsequent sale by widow’s administrator; Protection of minor’s proprietary interests; Purchaser’s liability where sale is secret and seller fails to justify disposal; Confirmation of District Land and Housing Tribunal decision.
|
20 July 2006 |
|
Where a loan agreement is silent on default, an agreed upfront consideration is not enforceable as continuing interest; court interest may be awarded.
Contract law – loan agreement silent on default – stipulated payment (Shs.30,000) held to be consideration not post‑default interest; Law of Contract Ordinance ss.73 and 74 discussed – need for express stipulation for penalties/increased interest; court‑rate interest awarded where contract silent.
|
18 July 2006 |
|
|
18 July 2006 |
|
Convictions for forgery and uttering quashed where prosecution failed to prove the signature was forged; dispute was civil.
Criminal law – Forgery and uttering – Proof beyond reasonable doubt of a forged signature; civil dispute improperly criminalized; improper charging of a non‑interested co‑accused; signatures may vary.
|
13 July 2006 |
|
Leave to refile after withdrawal is granted only where a formal defect or other sufficient grounds under Order XXIII are shown.
* Civil Procedure – Order XXIII, rule 1(2) – Withdrawal with leave to refile requires a formal defect or other sufficient grounds. * Relief – Dropping a defendant is remedied by amendment or striking out, not necessarily by withdrawal and leave to refile. * Costs – Defendant entitled to costs incurred up to withdrawal when plaintiff withdraws on hearing date.
|
5 July 2006 |
| June 2006 |
|
|
Registration in the applicant's name is not conclusive proof of a gift; the property formed part of the estate.
Probate and administration – Appointment of administrator – Whether property registered in relative's name constitutes a gift – Evidence of intention to transfer ownership – Registration alone not conclusive.
|
29 June 2006 |
|
Applicant failed to prove a gift; property formed part of the deceased's estate; appeal dismissed with costs.
Succession and estate administration – Proof of ownership – Whether registration or sale document in another's name constitutes a gift – Intention of deceased and factual findings on occupation and notification – Appellate review of factual determinations.
|
29 June 2006 |
|
An advocate must lodge a bill for taxation in the High Court; ex parte judgment without service and a suit for instruction fees were quashed.
* Civil procedure – ex parte hearing – requirement of service of amended plaint before entering ex parte judgment; * Advocates’ remuneration – Advocates Remuneration and Taxation of Costs Rules, 1991 – necessity to lodge a bill of costs in the High Court for taxation; * Professional conduct – prohibition (r.12) on agreeing remuneration above the Rules; * Improper forum – advocate cannot recover High Court instruction fees by ordinary suit in Resident Magistrate's Court.
|
29 June 2006 |
|
|
29 June 2006 |
|
High Court overruled res subjudice objection where only a jurisdictional point was pending on appeal, allowing substantive land claims to proceed.
Civil procedure – preliminary objection – res subjudice doctrine – distinction between pending jurisdictional challenge and pending substantive dispute – Land law – jurisdiction under Land Act 1999 s.167(1) – competence of High Court to determine ownership and title revocation while jurisdictional appeal pending.
|
29 June 2006 |
|
Court struck out portions of a counter‑affidavit for improper incorporation of a preliminary objection and later dismissed the suit for repeated non‑appearance.
Civil procedure – affidavits – improper incorporation of a notice of preliminary objection into a counter‑affidavit – partial striking out; Civil procedure – dismissal for non‑appearance – application of Order 27 r.2 and O.9 r.3 of the Civil Procedure Code.
|
29 June 2006 |
|
Appellate court upheld trespass liability and damages for destruction of respondent’s rented rooms; appeal dismissed with costs.
Civil law – Trespass and destruction of property; credibility findings – appellate deference to trial court; damages assessment – adequacy and reasonableness of award despite lack of explicit trial-court reasoning; defence of execution of prior decree considered and rejected.
|
29 June 2006 |
|
Court found equal spousal contributions and ordered sale and equal division of matrimonial property.
Family law — Matrimonial property division — Contribution by spouses; informal business income and supervisory acts count as contribution; appellate fact-finding — additional evidence and correction of erroneous share; remedy — sale of matrimonial house and equal division of proceeds.
|
29 June 2006 |
|
|
23 June 2006 |