|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2003 |
|
|
Conviction based on uncorroborated identification and footprints was unsafe; conviction quashed and sentence set aside.
Criminal law – identification of stolen property – need for marks/corroboration; identification by footprints – expert evidence under s.47 Evidence Act; suspicion insufficient for conviction; proof of possession must be direct or independently corroborated.
|
4 December 2003 |
|
|
2 December 2003 |
| November 2003 |
|
|
Application for extension to appeal dismissed; ownership dispute must be resolved by civil action, not by criminal trespass appeal.
Criminal law – Trespass – Where ownership of land is genuinely disputed, criminal trespass proceedings should not proceed; complainant should be advised to bring civil action to determine title. Civil procedure – Appeal out of time – court may consider certification date of judgment copy when computing time for filing appeal.
|
25 November 2003 |
|
Appellate court upheld sexual‑offence convictions despite lack of express corroboration warning, finding sufficient corroborative evidence and no miscarriage of justice.
* Criminal law – sexual offences – adult complainant – requirement for caution/corroboration and consequence of failure to warn; corroboration by surrounding circumstances and other witnesses may suffice.
* Evidence – credibility findings of trial court ordinarily binding on appeal absent compelling reasons.
* Proof of injury – absence of medical report not fatal where other evidence proves the offence.
* Criminal procedure – defective particulars not necessarily prejudicial if no injustice shown.
* Sentencing – appellate interference only where sentence is excessive or founded on wrong principle.
|
24 November 2003 |
|
Appeal allowed where prosecution improperly used appellant's police statement and identification evidence was unreliable.
* Criminal law – Evidence – Use of extra-judicial statement to contradict accused – prosecution must draw attention to inconsistent portions and allow explanation before tendering statement. * Criminal law – Identification evidence – reliability, delay in arrest and failure to pursue to accused's home may render identification unsafe. * Conviction unsafe where improper admission/relied-upon statement plus weaknesses in identification and discrepancies in ownership exist.
|
12 November 2003 |
| October 2003 |
|
|
|
28 October 2003 |
|
Night-time identification under poor lighting and contradictory witness accounts rendered the conviction unsafe; appeal allowed.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – Night-time identification by moonlight and torch – Conditions unfavourable for accurate identification; Contradictory eyewitness accounts and differing village origins weaken identification; Failure to tender alleged stolen property as exhibit undermines prosecution; Conviction unsafe and quashed.
|
23 October 2003 |
|
|
23 October 2003 |
| August 2003 |
|
|
Insufficient identification of stolen goods and procedural irregularities warranted quashing of conviction and sentence.
Criminal law – shop-breaking and stealing – identification of stolen property; insufficiency of evidence; possession of unidentifed items not proof of theft; procedural fairness – delayed transmission of record; trial in absentia and substitution of charge; appellate intervention and quashing of conviction.
|
13 August 2003 |
|
The applicant failed to establish sufficient cause to extend time for appeal; application dismissed with costs.
Limitation of actions – extension of time – s.14(1) Law of Limitation Act; negligence of counsel not ordinarily sufficient; merits of appeal generally irrelevant to extension of time; special or peculiar circumstances must be proved; requirement of supporting evidence for claims (e.g., medical proof of indisposition).
|
11 August 2003 |
| May 2003 |
|
|
|
22 May 2003 |
| April 2003 |
|
|
Appellate court excluded un-voir-dired child evidence but upheld convictions based on appellant’s admissions and sale of stolen property.
Criminal law – admissibility of child witness evidence – requirement of voir dire; appellate procedure – inadmissible to raise factual defences or complaints for first time on appeal; corroboration and admissions – sale of stolen property as evidence of guilt.
|
14 April 2003 |
|
Repudiated confession and improperly admitted hearsay, plus procedural failings, rendered the trial unfair and the conviction unsafe.
Criminal law — Evidence — repudiated confession — requirement to hold a trial-within-a-trial (voir dire) before admitting confession; Evidence Act s.34 — limits to hearsay exceptions and inadmissible absent-witness statements; Search and seizure — necessity to allow inquiry about announcement/legality of search; Procedural irregularity — failure to properly record/sign judgment affecting safety of conviction.
|
9 April 2003 |
|
|
9 April 2003 |
|
Adultery may be proved by admission and circumstantial evidence; damages discretionary and reduced from 500,000 to 100,000.
* Family law — Adultery — Proof — Circumstantial evidence and admissions sufficient; direct in flagrante delicto evidence or three eyewitnesses not required. * Damages for adultery — s.74 Law of Marriage Act 1971 — discretionary, non-punitive; regard to community custom and cohabitation; quantum must be justified.
|
3 April 2003 |
| March 2003 |
|
|
Extension of time to appeal refused for inordinate delay and lack of arguable appeal on matrimonial asset division.
* Civil procedure – Extension of time to appeal – Applicant must show sufficient or good reasons for delay and arguable points of appeal. * Matrimonial property – Division of assets – Section 114(2) Law of Marriage Act 1971 factors: community custom, parties’ contributions, joint debts, and needs of infant children. * Appellate review – District court’s proportional division upheld where statutory factors properly considered.
|
26 March 2003 |
|
|
14 March 2003 |
|
Poor identification and investigative failures rendered robbery convictions unsafe; appeal allowed and appellants acquitted.
Criminal law – Robbery with violence – Reliability of identification evidence — Identification parade conducted after suspects had appeared in court and while witness was injured — Known villagemate identified — Poor investigation — Failure to call searcher or tender ballistic evidence — Conviction unsafe.
|
14 March 2003 |
|
Appeal allowed: identification evidence and parade unreliable and investigation negligent, so convictions quashed and sentences set aside.
Criminal law — Identification evidence — Reliability of in‑court identifications after nighttime assault with lights blown out; identification parade conducted after accused shown in court — Weight of parade diminished. Criminal procedure — Duty of thorough investigation and proper chain of evidence for recovered weapons/ammunition — Casual/neglectful investigation may render conviction unsafe. Appeal — Appellate court may quash convictions where evidence is unreliable and prosecution does not support conviction.
|
14 March 2003 |
|
|
10 March 2003 |
|
Conviction quashed where victim was incompetent and prosecution lacked reliable evidence linking the appellant to the assault.
Evidence — Competence of witness under section 127 — Unsound mind and inability to give rational answers; Corroboration — Medical evidence of rape/sodomy insufficient alone to identify accused; Procedure — Absence and non-testimony of police arresting officers and conflicting arrest accounts fatal to prosecution case; Criminal appeal — Conviction unsafe where identity and link to accused not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
|
10 March 2003 |
|
Appeal dismissed: recent possession and credible identification sustain robbery with violence conviction despite no PF3.
Criminal law – Robbery with violence – identification and recent possession – PF3/medical evidence not required where no injury needing treatment – failure to call independent search witnesses; sentence: statutory minimum.
|
10 March 2003 |
| February 2003 |
|
|
Appellate court quashed conviction for stealing by agent due to inconsistent evidence and lack of corroborating documentation.
Criminal law – Stealing by agent – sufficiency of evidence – contradictions in complainant’s account – absence of documentary proof of ownership/handing over – appellate re-evaluation and quashing of unsafe conviction.
|
24 February 2003 |
| January 2003 |
|
|
|
1 January 2003 |