|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| May 2004 |
|
|
Receiving judgment after sentence completion does not excuse late filing; must apply under s.361(b) showing good cause.
Criminal appeals – limitation period – appeal filed out of time – receipt of judgment after sentence completion does not extend time – application under s.361(b) Criminal Procedure Act 1985 required to seek leave to file out of time – necessity to show good cause.
|
11 May 2004 |
|
Conviction for burglary and theft upheld; cautioned confession held voluntary and alibi properly rebutted.
Criminal law – Burglary and theft – sufficiency of evidence to convict – confessional admissions and corroboration. Evidence – admissibility of cautioned statements and extrajudicial confessions – voluntariness and trial‑within‑a‑trial. Criminal procedure – alibi defence – prosecution's burden to rebut on balance of probabilities. Sentence review – appellate intervention only where sentence based on improper grounds.
|
10 May 2004 |
|
Confession and caution statement found voluntary and admissible; alibi rejected; convictions, sentence and compensation upheld.
Criminal law – Burglary and theft – Admissibility of confessions and caution statements – Compliance with s.52 Criminal Procedure Act – Trial‑within‑a‑trial – Alibi: burden and standard (balance of probabilities) – Sentence review.
|
10 May 2004 |
| April 2004 |
|
|
Unauthorised representation and an unexplained court inspection rendered the Primary Court’s property award invalid, warranting a fresh hearing.
Family law – division of matrimonial property – application not pleaded in divorce proceedings – Primary Court should not decide issues not raised by parties. Civil procedure – representation in Magistrates’ Courts – section 33(2) requires court permission and party’s request for a relative/household member to represent a litigant. Procedural irregularity – suo motu inspection by trial court without record or application – grounds for quashing judgment.
|
30 April 2004 |
|
Section 59 protection does not apply where a mortgage preceded spouses' occupation; appeal allowed with costs.
Family law – Matrimonial property – Section 59 Law of Marriage Act 1971 – Protection against alienation applies only where property was occupied as matrimonial home at time of alienation; Civil procedure – Costs – Section 30(1) CPC – judicial exercise of discretion; Mortgage law – effect of mortgage executed before occupation.
|
29 April 2004 |
|
Conviction for rape of an under‑ten child upheld; illegal 30‑year term substituted with mandatory life imprisonment.
Criminal law – Rape of a child under ten – penetration (even slight) sufficient; medical PF.3 evidentiary weight despite non‑attendance of medical officer if not challenged. Evidence – family witnesses and corroboration – corroboration good practice but not mandatory absent collusion. Evidence – voir dire of child witnesses – omission affects status of testimony but may be cured by external corroboration. Sentencing – mandatory life imprisonment for rape of a girl under ten (section 131(3)).
|
24 April 2004 |
|
Conviction quashed where prosecution relied on uncorroborated co-accused evidence and failed to prove theft or breaking.
Criminal law – theft and shopbreaking – sufficiency of evidence – inadmissibility of co-accused’s evidence as sole corroboration – requirement for independent reliable corroboration – conviction quashed for lack of proof.
|
21 April 2004 |
|
Convictions for corruption quashed because witness contradictions and lack of supporting documentary evidence made the verdict unsafe.
Criminal law – Corruption by agent – conviction based on oral testimony – credibility and internal contradictions of prosecution witnesses; documentary exhibit not tendered – convictions unsafe. Evidence – assessment of credibility – appellate interference where trial findings are unsupported by record.
|
15 April 2004 |
|
Appellants’ convictions for forgery and uttering false documents upheld; absence of NEC witness not fatal to prosecution.
Criminal law – Forgery and uttering false documents – Proof beyond reasonable doubt; Evidence – Documentary and circumstantial evidence; Burden of proof as to lawful examination candidacy; Admissibility of witness absence (National Examination Council) – not necessarily fatal; Educational professionals’ liability when certifying examination documents.
|
7 April 2004 |
|
|
7 April 2004 |
| March 2004 |
|
|
Applicant’s leave to appeal out of time dismissed where no notice of appeal existed and no good cause was shown.
Criminal procedure – section 361(a) CPA 1985 – requirement to give notice of intention to appeal within ten days – absence of notice precludes appeal. Criminal procedure – proviso to section 361 – admission of appeal out of time for good cause; applicant must explain delay. Evidence and credibility – false affidavit and failure to produce notice justify dismissal of application for leave to appeal out of time.
|
29 March 2004 |
|
Leave to appeal out of time dismissed where no notice of appeal was filed and the applicant falsely claimed otherwise.
Criminal procedure – notice of intention to appeal – requirement under section 361(a) of ten days; Leave to appeal out of time – proviso to section 361 – admission for good cause shown; Evidence and credibility – false affidavit about lodging notice of appeal fatal to application; Failure to produce notice or explain delay results in dismissal of application for leave to appeal out of time.
|
29 March 2004 |
|
Applicant’s attempt to revive a struck-out appeal was dismissed for circumvention and overwhelming incriminating evidence.
Criminal procedure — Appeal and review — Attempt to revive or pursue an appeal after prior dismissal for being time-barred — Abuse of process/circumvention of earlier order; strong identification evidence and related robbery allegations — Application dismissed.
|
29 March 2004 |
|
Application for extension of time to appeal dismissed for inordinate unexplained delay and lack of prospects of success.
Extension of time to appeal – requirement to account for delay – corroborative evidence of illness – inordinate and unexplained delay – consideration of prospects of success in exercising discretion to extend time.
|
22 March 2004 |
|
Extension of time to appeal refused for unexplained delay and lack of prospects of success.
Extension of time to appeal; failure to account for delay; necessity of credible evidence (e.g., medical records) to excuse delay; requirement of prima facie prospect of success as a consideration for granting extension.
|
22 March 2004 |
|
Conviction unsafe where confession likely coerced, hearsay and written statements improperly admitted, and trial mismanaged.
Criminal law
rms and ammunition
dmissibility of caution statements oerced confessions and trial-within-a-trial; Evidence Act s34B
dmissibility of written statements of unavailable/deceased witnesses ompliance with proof, declaration and service requirements; Criminal Procedure s214 onsequences where successor magistrate acts on incompletely recorded evidence; Improper tendering of exhibits and possibility of planted evidence render conviction unsafe.
|
22 March 2004 |
|
|
22 March 2004 |
|
Extension of time to appeal refused for unexplained delay and because the intended appeal lacked merit.
Criminal procedure — extension of time to appeal — delay must be satisfactorily explained — illness after expiration of appeal period not a sufficient explanation — leave futile if intended appeal lacks reasonable prospects.
|
16 March 2004 |
|
Applicant’s uncorroborated claim of notifying prison authorities failed to justify extension of time to appeal.
Criminal procedure – extension of time to file notice of intention to appeal – statutory ten‑day period under s.361(a) – applicant’s burden to show sufficient cause.
|
16 March 2004 |
|
Rape conviction quashed because prosecution failed to prove complainant was under 18 and incapable of consenting.
Criminal law – Rape – statutory element of age – Whether complainant was under 18 and therefore incapable of consenting; failure of prosecution to prove age beyond reasonable doubt – appeal – conviction quashed.
|
16 March 2004 |
|
An appeal filed outside the statutory 30-day period without leave is incompetent and must be struck out.
Appeals — Time limit for appeals from district courts exercising appellate jurisdiction over Primary Courts — section 25(1)(b) Magistrates' Courts Act, 1984 (Act No. 2/1984) — 30-day limitation. Civil procedure — Extension of time to appeal — Rule 3, Civil Procedure (Appeals in Proceedings Originating in Primary Courts) Rules, 1963 — requirement to apply for enlargement of time and show good cause. Jurisdiction — High Court lacks power to hear appeals filed outside prescribed period absent leave to appeal out of time. Procedure — Failure to apply for extension obliges court to strike out time-barred appeal.
|
10 March 2004 |
|
|
10 March 2004 |
|
An appeal filed outside the statutory 30-day period without leave is incompetent and must be struck out.
Appeals — statutory time limit — Magistrates' Courts Act s.25(1)(b) — 30-day filing requirement for appeals from district court in Primary Court matters. Civil Procedure (Appeals in Proceedings Originating in Primary Courts) Rules, 1963 — Rule 3 — enlargement of time — requirement to apply for leave and show good cause. Jurisdiction — High Court cannot entertain appeals filed outside prescribed period without leave — appeal struck out. Service and costs — no order as to costs where respondent not served and did not appear.
|
10 March 2004 |
|
Where a crowd attack involved many participants and witness accounts conflicted, conviction failed for lack of proof identifying the appellant.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – assault during a crowd incident – necessity of proving which accused inflicted the injury. Criminal law – Multiple assailants – effect of many attackers and acquittal of co-accused on establishing common intent. Evidence – contradictions in prosecution witnesses – benefit of doubt to accused.
|
8 March 2004 |
|
Conviction quashed where prosecution failed to prove who inflicted the grievous harm beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Grievous harm – Identification of assailant – Conflicting witness testimony – Failure to prove beyond reasonable doubt – No basis for common intention where co-accused acquitted.
|
8 March 2004 |
|
Conviction for grievous harm quashed where evidence failed to identify the assailant and common intent was unproven.
Criminal law – grievous harm – identification of assailant – contradictions in prosecution witnesses – acquittal of co-accused – common intention not established – benefit of doubt.
|
8 March 2004 |
|
Appeal against armed robbery convictions dismissed: identification and circumstantial evidence found sufficient; sentences upheld, corporal punishment set aside.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – Elements of robbery under s.285 Penal Code – Identification evidence – Reliability of recognition and identification parade – Possession of recently stolen property as circumstantial evidence – Sentencing; concurrent terms and removal of unspecified corporal punishment.
|
8 March 2004 |
|
Charge under a repealed statute is invalid and cannot be cured by section 388; conviction quashed.
Criminal law – charges preferred under repealed statute – repeal abrogates prior law so no valid charge exists; Criminal Procedure Act s.388 cannot cure absence of legal basis for charge; sentencing – failure to consider statutory option of fine may render custodial sentence inappropriate.
|
8 March 2004 |
|
Charge under a statute repealed before institution cannot be cured; conviction quashed and sentence set aside.
Criminal law – Charge under repealed statute – Repeal abrogates earlier law so no offence exists – Section 388 CPA does not cure charge founded on non-existent statute; Sentencing – duty to consider and offer option of fine where law permits before imposing imprisonment; Plea equivocality – not decided where charge invalid at law.
|
8 March 2004 |
|
Unreliable identification, lack of proof of weapons, and irregular searches vitiated armed robbery convictions.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – Reliability of eyewitness identification – Identification parade defects and possible tutoring – Proof of weapons – Irregular search and seizure and improper linkage of exhibits.
|
8 March 2004 |
|
|
3 March 2004 |
|
Late appeal application dismissed for inadequate reasons, procedural defect and no reasonable prospect of success.
Extension of time to appeal – s.25(1) Magistrates' Courts Act – requirements for granting extension; delay and laches. Grounds for delay – age, illiteracy and being misled by court staff – insufficient to justify inordinate delay. Procedure – omission to cite enabling statutory provision in chamber summons is fatal irregularity. Merits threshold – applicant must demonstrate reasonable prospect of success; concurrent findings of lower courts undermine such prospect.
|
1 March 2004 |
| February 2004 |
|
|
Appeal dismissed: conviction corroborated by independent witness and recent-possession; statutory minimum sentence upheld.
Criminal law – burglary and stealing – corroboration of co-accused’s confession – independent witness identification and recent possession doctrine. Evidence – handwriting identification – admissibility of lay opinion under section 49 Evidence Act 1967. Sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act 1972 – statutory minimum and absence of special reasons to mitigate.
|
27 February 2004 |
|
Conviction for armed robbery quashed because identification parade and eyewitness evidence were unreliable and unsafe.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – Conviction based on visual identification – Reliability of identification evidence and circumstances affecting correct identification. Identification parade – Proper conduct – Whether failure to permit change of clothes rendered parade unfair. Evidence – Eye-witness description – Failure to describe assailant undermines identification. Admissibility – Police caution statement – Necessity of opportunity to challenge. Appeal – Conviction quashed where identification and evidence unsafe.
|
26 February 2004 |
|
Trial of a child sexual-offence in open court contrary to mandatory in-camera provisions renders conviction null and release appropriate.
Criminal procedure – Sexual offences – Mandatory in-camera trials for child victims (Act No. 4/1998, ss.24,27,28) – Non-compliance renders proceedings null and void; curative provisions (s.388 CPA) inapplicable; insufficient corroboration – retrial refused.
|
24 February 2004 |
|
An appeal filed beyond the 45‑day statutory limit without leave is time‑barred and must be struck out.
Criminal procedure – s.361(b) CPA 1985 – 45‑day statutory appeal period – exceptions: time to obtain certified copy and leave on showing good cause – appeal filed out of time without leave – ignorance of law not a defence.
|
17 February 2004 |
|
Applicant bypassed mandatory district court appeal route, gave unproved sickness excuse, and filed a vague, dismissible application.
Civil procedure – Appeals from primary courts – Requirement under s.25(3) Magistrates' Courts Act to first file appeal in district court. Extension of time – Necessity of credible supporting evidence (medical proof) to justify late filing. Competence – Application to High Court after district court refused leave to file out of time; necessity to state clearly what decision is being challenged. Vague or untenable applications – Failure to specify relief sought renders application liable to dismissal.
|
17 February 2004 |
|
Application for leave to appeal out of time dismissed for lack of valid affidavit, insufficient cause and no prospects of success.
Criminal procedure – leave to appeal out of time – requirement to show sufficient cause – validity of affidavit (must be sworn/attested) – proof of prison-related delay – section 361(a) Criminal Procedure Act 1985 – merits/prospects test for granting leave.
|
16 February 2004 |
| January 2004 |
|
|
Corruption convictions quashed where trial court ignored defence evidence and prosecution failed to prove corrupt intent beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Corruption offences – Curability of conviction under repealed provision where re-enacted identically; Evidence – duty to evaluate prosecution and defence as a whole; Mental element – innocent belief in lawful authority to levy fines negates corrupt intent; Procedure – charging soliciting and receiving from same facts may be superfluous.
|
1 January 2004 |
|
Application for leave to appeal dismissed; revision properly dismissed under s.372(2) Criminal Procedure Act, and Court of Appeal not required to 'interpret' High Court order.
Criminal procedure – Revision under s.372 Criminal Procedure Act 1985 – Application dismissed under s.372(2) where alleged irregularities do not finally determine trial; Appointment of public prosecutor (s.95) is preliminary; Court of Appeal jurisdiction (Article 117; s.4 Appellate Jurisdiction Act) is to hear appeals/revision, not to give abstract interpretation of High Court orders.
|
1 January 2004 |