|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| October 2012 |
|
|
Applicant failed to show good cause for a one‑year delay; extension of time to appeal denied.
Civil procedure — Extension of time to appeal — Good and sufficient cause required — Delay of over one year — Credibility of applicant’s affidavit; inconsistent/afterthought reasons — Application dismissed with costs.
|
21 October 2012 |
|
Conviction quashed where caution statement was admitted without trial-within-trial and recent-possession link was unreliable.
Criminal law – caution statements – necessity of trial-within-trial where voluntariness is contested; recent-possession doctrine – insufficient link where recovery circumstances and third-party explanations are inconsistent; conviction quashed for inadequate evidence.
|
15 October 2012 |
|
The appellant lacked locus standi to sue; only the deceased's estate administrator could properly claim in respect of the stall.
Land law – Locus standi – Capacity to sue in respect of property allocated to a deceased person – Only administrator of deceased’s estate may bring claims; proceedings where plaintiff lacks capacity are tainted and susceptible to being quashed.
|
8 October 2012 |
|
Failure to record required s.127(2) voir dire findings renders child’s evidence inadmissible and conviction unsustainable.
* Evidence Act s.127(2) – Child witness – voir dire – court must record opinion that child has sufficient intelligence and understands duty to tell truth; non‑compliance renders evidence inadmissible. * Hearsay – statements by child to others insufficient to prove elements of rape without admissible direct evidence or corroboration. * Rape – requirement of proof of penetration; medical evidence alone must be sufficient if child’s evidence excluded.
|
2 October 2012 |
| September 2012 |
|
|
Appellate court upheld armed robbery conviction on identification and recent possession but substituted a 30-year mandatory sentence.
* Criminal law – Armed robbery – Identification evidence at night – Waziri Amani principles apply; * Recent possession doctrine – recovery shortly after offence supports conviction; * Corroboration – no duty to call peripheral responders or vehicle occupants who were not eyewitnesses; * Fair trial – re-prosecution lawful after nullification; prior exhibits need not be retendered if unavailable; * Sentencing – statutory minimum 30 years for armed robbery must be imposed.
|
10 September 2012 |
|
Convictions quashed where prosecution evidence was doubtful and charge particulars omitted the requisite intent to defraud.
* Criminal law – Forgery – authenticity of document – disowned signatures and failure to call material witness undermined prosecution case. * Criminal procedure – Particulars of offence – omission to allege intention to defraud is fatal and not curable under section 388 (Msafiri Kulindwa). * Burden of proof – accused raising justificatory facts must adduce supporting evidence; trial court may require proof on such issue. * Benefit of doubt – where prosecution evidence is doubtful, it benefits the accused.
|
4 September 2012 |
| August 2012 |
|
|
Conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm quashed where single‑witness evidence lacked direct corroboration, leaving reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Possession of firearm – Proof beyond reasonable doubt; single witness evidence; need for direct corroboration; admissibility and weight of statements under section 34B; statutory seizure formalities (receipt) and effect on safety of conviction.
|
28 August 2012 |
|
First appellant’s conviction upheld on reliable identification; second appellant acquitted after caution statement expunged for procedural error.
Criminal law – armed robbery; admissibility of retracted caution statement; duty to inquire before admitting confession; identification evidence and corroboration (daylight identification and victim’s written naming); burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt; quashing conviction where primary inculpatory statement is expunged.
|
27 August 2012 |
|
Appeal dismissed; both parties had village allocations but boundary confusion and lack of proof defeated appellant's claim; replacement plot ordered.
* Land law – village land allocations – effect of customary allocation procedures and lack of permanent demarcation on competing title claims.
* Evidence – burden to prove encroachment and to identify allocated boundaries; weight given to improvement/development.
* Remedy – allocation of replacement plot by Village Land Council where identification fails; costs where confusion caused by village authority.
|
22 August 2012 |
|
Conviction based on handwriting opinion and uncorroborated receipts set aside for lack of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt; handwriting expert evidence – limited to similarity and not determinative of authorship; documentary evidence – receipts must connect accused to alleged transaction; conviction unsafe where prosecution fails to prove identity and participation.
|
15 August 2012 |
|
Insufficient voire dire and lack of corroboration rendered the rape conviction unsafe; appeal allowed and conviction quashed.
Criminal law – Rape – Child complainant’s capacity to testify and adequacy of voir dire – Relatives’ testimony and credibility – Tendering of PF3 by non-examining person – Curable procedural irregularity under s.388 Criminal Procedure Act – Proof beyond reasonable doubt and need for corroboration in rape cases.
|
15 August 2012 |
| July 2012 |
|
|
A rape conviction cannot rest solely on an uncorroborated victim's allegation naming the accused.
* Criminal law – Rape – Penetration: pregnancy may render separate proof of penetration unnecessary.
* Evidence – Medical report (PF3) admissibility – Where author testifies and is cross-examined, section 240(3) rights satisfied.
* Evidence – Uncorroborated victim statement – Insufficient basis for criminal conviction; criminal standard (beyond reasonable doubt) required.
* Appeal – Conviction unsafe where verdict rests solely on uncorroborated allegation.
|
24 July 2012 |
| June 2012 |
|
|
Nighttime visual identification without particulars is unsafe; conviction quashed and procedural breach under s.226(2) noted.
* Criminal law – Rape – Visual identification – Identification at night – need for explanation of aids and descriptive particulars before relying on visual ID (Waziri Aminani principle).
* Criminal procedure – Trial in absence – s.226(1) & (2) Criminal Procedure Act – on rearrest accused must be remitted to court before imprisonment (Marwa Mahende; Shila Shindano).
* Conviction quashed where identification evidence is unsafe and procedural irregularity noted.
|
29 June 2012 |
|
Conspiracy conviction quashed but theft conviction upheld on recent possession; sentences reduced to five years.
* Criminal law – Theft – Doctrine of recent possession – Possession of recently stolen property creates an inference of guilt absent satisfactory explanation.
* Criminal law – Conspiracy – Circumstantial evidence – Insufficient circumstantial link to convict appellants of conspiracy with hospital watchmen.
* Evidence – Witness contradictions and hearsay – Insufficient to overturn theft conviction where possession and other indicia established.
* Sentencing – Appellate reduction where maximum sentence imposed without adequate reasons.
|
26 June 2012 |
|
Convicted in absentia, the appellant must be allowed to present defence; absconding forfeited his cross‑examination right.
Criminal law – Rape – Conviction in absentia – Absconding accused forfeits procedural rights including cross‑examination – Victim’s direct testimony sufficient; hearsay from relative not a substitute – Remittal to trial court to permit defence evidence.
|
26 June 2012 |
|
Appeal allowed: equivocal guilty pleas and unlawful licence cancellations quashed; retrial ordered before another magistrate.
* Criminal law – guilty plea – plea must be unequivocal and admit every constituent element of the offence; responses like "It is true" may be equivocal. * Traffic law – careless driving – prosecution must specify acts/omissions constituting carelessness; contradictions with sketch map may render facts equivocal. * Road Traffic Act s.27(1)(a) – cancellation of driving licence requires opportunity for accused to advance special reasons. * Criminal procedure – convictions vitiated by procedural/irregular defects may be quashed and retrial ordered where interests of justice require it.
|
26 June 2012 |
|
Conviction upheld on recent possession; exhibit non-tender not fatal; sentence mitigated by student status and immediate release ordered.
* Criminal law – Theft – Recent possession doctrine as proof of theft where accused found shortly after crime; Martin Ernest principle applied. * Evidence – Failure to tender physical exhibits (animals) – defect affects weight not validity where photograph and unshaken testimony admitted (Julius Bilie). * Sentencing – Youth/student status as mitigating factor – appellate interference warranted to allow leniency and continuation of education.
|
25 June 2012 |
|
A repudiated caution statement cannot sustain conviction without a voluntariness inquiry or independent corroboration.
Criminal procedure – Repudiated caution statement – necessity of inquiry or trial-within-trial to ascertain voluntariness – requirement for independent corroboration – visual identification at night – convictions unsafe if caution statement acted upon without inquiry.
|
25 June 2012 |
|
Recent possession and positive identification upheld appellant's conviction and 15-year sentence for robbery with violence.
* Criminal law – Robbery with violence – sufficiency of evidence – positive identification of stolen property and recent possession; * Doctrine of recent possession – applicability where stolen property recovered shortly after theft and accused gives no plausible explanation; * Defence considerations – duty to evaluate but may be rejected if inconsistent with cogent prosecution evidence; * Sentence – minimum prescribed term justified.
|
5 June 2012 |
|
Convictions for cattle theft quashed for inadequate identification, unproven confessions, and failure to consider defence.
* Criminal law – Theft of cattle – Identification of stolen property – requirement for specific description or production of exhibits; photographs insufficient if not shown to be from scene.
* Evidence – Confession – alleged admissions to third parties (sungusungu/militiamen) – material witnesses not called; adverse inference may be drawn against prosecution.
* Criminal procedure – Duty to consider and evaluate defence evidence; judgment must state points of determination and reasons.
* Doctrine of recent/possession – cannot substitute for positive identification where evidential foundation is lacking.
|
1 June 2012 |
| May 2012 |
|
|
Uncorroborated child evidence and lack of procedural safeguards can invalidate convictions; sentencing above minimum requires stated reasons.
Criminal law – evidence of child witnesses requires voir dire and independent corroboration; recent possession and failure to explain permits inference of theft; recovery of stolen firearm witnessed by civilians can rebut planting allegations; sentencing — reasons required if exceeding statutory minimum.
|
29 May 2012 |
|
Insufficient night identification and unlawfully obtained caution statements rendered the convictions unsafe and were quashed.
* Criminal law – visual identification at night – Amani Waziri factors – need to establish time, distance, lighting, length of observation and prior acquaintance. * Criminal procedure – caution statements – sections 50 and 51 CPA – basic interview period, lawful extensions, voluntariness and inquiry on objection. * Unsafe conviction – improperly admitted evidence vitiates conviction; quashing and setting aside sentences.
|
21 May 2012 |
|
Conviction for armed robbery quashed: caution statement inadmissible and prosecution evidence unreliable, sentence set aside.
* Criminal law – armed robbery – proof beyond reasonable doubt; admissibility of caution statements – duty to conduct inquiry upon objection; improperly tendered exhibits; credibility of recovery evidence; effect of charging under repealed but identically re-enacted provision.
|
14 May 2012 |
| April 2012 |
|
|
Long undisturbed possession over 12 years bars recovery; time runs from adverse possession, not owner’s awareness.
* Land law – Adverse possession – Long undisturbed possession can bar recovery after statutory period (12 years).
* Limitation Act (Cap 89 R.E. 2002) applicability – Applies to District Land and Housing Tribunal and High Court per s.52(2) Land Disputes Court Act (Cap 216 R.E. 2002); not to Ward Tribunals.
* Time for limitation runs from date of adverse possession, not from owner’s awareness.
* Protecting long and undisturbed possession even if initial entry was wrongful.
|
18 April 2012 |
|
Appeal against armed robbery conviction dismissed; evidence, cautioned statement and seizure lawfully admitted and credible.
Criminal law – armed robbery – identification and arrest at scene; admissibility of cautioned statement; PF3 evidence not always determinative; search and seizure during struggle; acquittal of co-accused where identification lacking; appellate review of credibility findings.
|
17 April 2012 |
| March 2012 |
|
|
Appeal dismissed where corroborated identification and recent-possession inference sustain cattle theft conviction.
Criminal law – cattle theft – identification and corroboration – recent possession inference – reliance on co-accused evidence – no fixed number of witnesses required – defence considered and rejected.
|
23 March 2012 |