|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| November 2011 |
|
|
Conviction for refusing to send a child to school quashed where disputed paternity was not first determined.
* Criminal law – offence of refusing to send a child to school – conviction where paternity disputed. * Evidence – importance of determining parentage before imposing parental obligations. * Procedure – lower courts should direct parties to appropriate civil remedies (including DNA testing) to resolve paternity before criminal prosecution.
|
8 November 2011 |
|
Conviction quashed where prosecution failed to disprove alternative access and reasonable doubt remained.
Criminal law – burden of proof – proof beyond reasonable doubt; benefit of doubt to accused where prosecution fails to disprove alternative suspects or access; assessment and critical scrutiny of prosecution witnesses; duty to investigate material defence allegations.
|
2 November 2011 |
| October 2011 |
|
|
Cautioned statement properly admitted but not a confession; a victim's credible uncorroborated testimony can sustain a rape conviction under s.127(7).
* Evidence – Cautioned statement – Admissibility – Substantial compliance with statutory warnings and absence of contemporaneous objection justify admission. * Evidence – Confession – Admission of intercourse with purported consent is not a confession of rape. * Sexual offences – Corroboration – Victim’s uncorroborated testimony may sustain conviction under s.127(7) if credible. * Rape – Credibility assessment – threat with knife, resistance and forced penetration established non-consent.
|
17 October 2011 |
|
Conviction based solely on a repudiated co-accused confession and unproved identification of common items is unsafe.
* Criminal law – admissibility of cautioned statements – irregular admission where accused not separately afforded opportunity to object.
* Evidence – repudiated co-accused confession requires independent corroboration before it may ground conviction of another.
* Identification of stolen goods – common articles (empty beer crates) require clear, distinctive proof of ownership.
|
11 October 2011 |
|
Weak identification, unlinked weapon, improperly admitted PF3 and cautioned statement led court to quash conviction and order release.
* Criminal law – identification of accused – requirements for visual identification at night and necessity of identification parade. * Evidence – linkage of exhibit (weapon) to offence – necessity of proof such as bloodstains. * Criminal Procedure Act s.240(3) – admissibility of medical reports (PF3) and accused’s right to require the doctor to be called. * Evidence Act s.27 – voluntariness of cautioned/confessional statements; onus on prosecution. * Criminal burden of proof – duty remains on prosecution; accused need only raise reasonable doubt.
|
4 October 2011 |
| September 2011 |
|
|
Appeal dismissed: trial procedures regular and prosecution proved child rape beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – rape of a child – competency and voire dire of child witnesses; Evidence Act s127 (competency/corroboration); Criminal Procedure Act s200 and s231 (accused’s rights and defence procedure); proof of penetration and corroboration; appellate review of credibility findings.
|
27 September 2011 |
|
The appellant's challenge to nighttime identification failed; armed robbery conviction and sentence were upheld.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – Visual identification at night – sufficiency of lighting, proximity, prior acquaintance; mistaken identity principles (Waziri Amani test); admissibility and correct attribution of cautioned statements; weight of corroborative arrest evidence.
|
16 September 2011 |
| August 2011 |
|
|
Appellant’s challenges to identification, cautioned statement and ownership of seized property rejected; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – Identification evidence and necessity of identification parade; cautioned statements – admissibility and effect of failure to object; recent possession doctrine; accused’s right to call defence witnesses and consequences of failing to secure their attendance.
|
19 August 2011 |
|
A conviction based solely on weak night-time visual identification was unsafe and quashed for failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
* Criminal law – Visual identification – night-time identification with kerosene lamp – need for descriptive particulars and adequate lighting to eliminate mistaken identity; burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt; appellate intervention where conviction rests on unsafe identification.
|
17 August 2011 |
|
Conviction for armed robbery upheld where possession of recently stolen property and reliable witness identification proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
* Criminal law – Armed robbery – conviction upheld where accused found in possession of recently stolen property and positively identified by victims; absence of identification parade not fatal.
* Evidence – corroboration – recovery of victim's property and independent witness testimony corroborated arresting officers' accounts.
* Procedure – cautioned statement – prosecution not obliged to produce unless sought by defence.
* Identification – reliability depends on conditions (eg. lighting) and witnesses' opportunity to observe.
|
15 August 2011 |
|
Court upheld a preliminary objection, found itself functus officio and dismissed the applicant’s extension of time application.
* Criminal procedure – extension of time to lodge notice of appeal – Section 361(a) CPA; * Civil/criminal procedure – preliminary objection – defective supporting affidavit; * Jurisdiction – functus officio – finality of court decisions; * Exceptions to functus officio – ex parte decisions and fraud-induced reviews.
|
12 August 2011 |
|
Procedural failures in admitting PF3 and child evidence rendered the conviction unsafe; retrial ordered.
Criminal law – rape – admissibility of medical report (PF3) – non-compliance with s.240(3) CPA; Evidence – witnesses related to complainant – credibility; Evidence – tender-age witness – requirement of voire dire under s.127 Evidence Act; Remedy – retrial in interests of justice.
|
9 August 2011 |
| June 2011 |
|
|
Appeal allowed and convictions quashed for unsafe night-time identification evidence.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – Night-time offences – Requirement that identification be watertight before conviction – Child witness identification – Convictions quashed for unsafe identification.
|
29 June 2011 |
|
Tribunal rightly proceeded ex parte; findings of trespass, vacant possession and damages for loss of occupation upheld.
* Land law – Tenancy and trespass – occupant exceeded scope of lawful tenancy by occupying additional rooms; vacant possession ordered.
* Civil procedure – Ex parte proceedings – validity of service on principal officer and discretion to proceed ex parte when defendant defaults.
* Damages – mesne profits/loss of occupation and damages for withholding title deed arising from loan-security dispute related to tenancy.
|
10 June 2011 |
| May 2011 |
|
|
Conviction for rape of two children upheld; voire dire and victims' evidence found credible; sentence amended to life on each count concurrent.
Criminal law – Rape – conviction may be based on uncorroborated evidence of child victims where court records reasons and assesses credibility (s127(7) Evidence Act); Voir dire for child witnesses – trial court must determine understanding of oath or sufficient intelligence and duty to speak truth (s127(2)); Minor contradictions – normal discrepancies not necessarily fatal; Burden of proof – remains on prosecution; Sentencing – omnibus sentence may be amended to specify counts and concurrency (s388 Criminal Procedure Act).
|
24 May 2011 |
| April 2011 |
|
|
Whether warrantless search, exhibit identification and voluntariness of cautioned statement rendered conviction unsafe.
* Criminal procedure – warrantless searches – section 38 Criminal Procedure Act – reasonable grounds and admissibility of evidence seized.
* Evidence – identification of exhibits – necessity of adequate proof that seized items belong to alleged owner (Iddi v Republic principle).
* Evidence – cautioned/confessional statements – prosecution’s onus to prove voluntariness (Evidence Act s.27(2)) and requirement for trial‑within‑a‑trial or inquiry.
* Appeal – appellate re‑evaluation of evidence where trial court failed to address material points (D.R. Pandya; Shaban Amri).
|
15 April 2011 |
|
Nighttime identification and unrecorded admissions were unreliable; procedural lapses led to quashing of convictions.
Criminal law – Identification at night – visual and voice identification reliability; Criminal procedure – failure to record interviews/caution statements (s.57 CPA) and failure to issue seizure receipt (s.38(3) CPA); Evidence – onus to prove voluntariness of confessions (s.27 Evidence Act); Standard of proof – beyond reasonable doubt; Conviction quashed for unsafe evidence and procedural defects.
|
8 April 2011 |
| January 2011 |
|
|
Failure to prove marriage means property sale by registered owner was lawful; appeal dismissed.
Land law – Sale of land by alleged spouse; proof of marriage – evidentiary value of lost marriage certificate and police loss report obtained late; matrimonial home – requirement of proven subsisting marriage or proprietary interest; assessors – change before substantive hearing not fatal where no failure of justice.
|
1 January 2011 |