|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 1996 |
|
|
Convictions quashed for defective charges, insufficient proof of theft, and illegal/excessive sentences; seized goods restored.
Criminal law — Pleading requirements — Forgery: particulars must disclose the specific matter introduced into a document; Fraudulent false accounting (s.317) — particulars must allege falsification/entries in books or documents; Proof of theft — adequacy of evidence when alleged loss extends over long period; Sentencing — illegal/excessive sentences and improper consecutive maximum sentences; Restoration of seized property (Exh. P.47).
|
13 December 1996 |
|
Appellate court held domestic contributions relevant but not automatic entitlement; increased the wife’s share and allowed appeal in part.
Matrimonial property — division of assets — relevance and proof of non‑monetary (domestic/wifely) contributions — quantification of share — appellate variation of trial award.
|
11 December 1996 |
|
An appeal filed after the 30-day statutory period without prior leave is incompetent and is struck out.
Criminal procedure – Appeals – Time limit for appeals under section 25(1)(b) Magistrates' Courts Act – Leave required to file appeal out of time – Second appeal incompetent when filed after 30 days without prior leave.
|
4 December 1996 |
|
A Primary Court’s clan‑nominated appointment of an administrator prevails over a later District Court appointment lacking clan support.
Probate & administration — customary law and clan nomination — priority of Primary Court appointment over later District Court appointment lacking clan support — quashing superior court’s orders where customary procedure governs inheritance.
|
4 December 1996 |
|
Where a respondent fails to prove a claimed divorce, an enticement action by the lawful spouse may succeed.
* Family law — Enticement/adultery action — Right to sue dependent on existence of lawful marriage — burden to prove divorce. * Evidence — Failure to produce decree of divorce on appeal — adverse consequence of unproved assertion. * Civil procedure — Appellate review — error in deciding unpleaded or unproven issues.
|
3 December 1996 |
|
A district court cannot substitute convictions for an acquittal without giving the accused notice and an opportunity to be heard.
Criminal appeal — notice of hearing — section 34 Magistrates' Courts Act — right to be heard — natural justice — conviction substituted in appellant's absence — convictions quashed and matter remitted for rehearing de novo.
|
2 December 1996 |
| November 1996 |
|
|
Where a matrimonial house’s value is unstated, the court may order valuation and award a 25% monetary share instead of sale.
Matrimonial property – Division of assets – Failure to state asset value – Court may order expert valuation – Monetary award instead of sale – Consideration of occupants' welfare.
|
28 November 1996 |
|
District Court erred treating wife's share as compensation; High Court restored trial court's shs.20,000 award.
* Matrimonial property – Division of property acquired or improved during marriage – Distinction between compensatory payment for services and division of matrimonial assets – Appellate review where lower court applies wrong legal principle.
|
28 November 1996 |
|
Appeal dismissed; conviction and minimum custodial sentence for robbery upheld and Kiswahili judgment and trial procedure found valid.
* Criminal law – Robbery – Sufficiency of evidence – Conviction supported by complainant and two independent witnesses.
* Criminal procedure – Language of judgment – Use of Kiswahili by magistrates (s.13(2) Magistrates Courts Act).
* Criminal procedure – PF3 as exhibit – Right to call witnesses – Accused given opportunity to defend.
* Sentence – Minimum custodial sentence and corporal punishment – no interference absent constitutional challenge.
|
27 November 1996 |
|
First appellant's admission upheld his conviction; the same admission could not corroborate evidence against the second appellant, whose conviction was quashed.
* Criminal law – conviction based on co-accused's testimony – limits of corroboration. * Confession/admission in mitigation – effect on sustaining accused's conviction. * Appeal – quashing conviction where no admissible corroborative evidence supports co-accused's evidence.
|
26 November 1996 |
|
Credible eyewitness evidence upheld conviction for attempted stealing; twelve‑month sentence affirmed and appeal dismissed.
* Criminal law – Attempted stealing – Presence near vehicle at night with screwdriver – Credibility findings of watchman and prison warder – Appellant's explanation rejected as implausible.
* Evidence – Evaluation of witness credibility – Appellate interference declined where trial court's findings have rational basis.
* Sentencing – Twelve months' imprisonment upheld; deterrence relevant.
|
14 November 1996 |
|
Appeal dismissed: guilty-plea conviction unchallengeable and dangerous-driving conviction and sentences properly upheld.
* Road Traffic Act – dangerous driving causing bodily injury – sufficiency of evidence and assessment of witness credibility.
* Criminal procedure – plea of guilty – conviction entered after unequivocal plea not open to challenge on appeal (s.360(1) CPA).
* Appellate review – credibility findings – acceptance/rejection of witness evidence based on probabilities and physical evidence.
* Sentencing – deterrence in road-traffic offences – custodial sentences and disqualification upheld.
|
14 November 1996 |
|
Possession of recently stolen cattle supported conviction; mandatory five‑year sentences on each count were upheld.
* Criminal law – possession of recently stolen property – finding of guilt supported where accused found with stolen cattle shortly after theft.
* Evidence – credibility – appellate deference to trial court’s assessment of witnesses; re‑hearing of facts not warranted absent clear error.
* Sentencing – mandatory minimum sentence – five years on each count is prescribed and not subject to reduction by the court.
|
14 November 1996 |
| August 1996 |
|
|
Appeal dismissed—conviction for defilement upheld on reliable identification and uncorroborated alibi.
Criminal law – Defilement (child under 14) – Identification evidence; Credibility of child complainant; Eyewitness corroboration; Uncorroborated alibi; Appellate deference to trial court findings.
|
9 August 1996 |
|
Recent possession of stolen goods shortly after a burglary permits an inference of guilt absent adequate explanation.
Criminal law – Burglary and stealing – Doctrine of recent possession – Recovery of stolen goods less than a day after burglary – Possession without satisfactory explanation permits inference of guilt.
|
6 August 1996 |
| July 1996 |
|
|
Appeals dismissed: caution statement and victim identification were credible; no lawful agency authorised removal of school maize.
* Criminal law – theft from school property – agency and assent – prior transaction versus authority to collect goods; * Evidence – requirement to tender physical exhibits; * Evidence – calling of material but non-essential third-party witnesses; * Evidence Act s.27 – caution/confession admissibility and onus to prove voluntariness; * Identification – visual and voice identification by a neighbour under lighting; * Criminal appeals – sufficiency of evidence and interference with sentence.
|
1 July 1996 |
| March 1996 |
|
|
Conviction for cattle theft upheld, but eight-year custodial sentence quashed as illegal for a juvenile and substituted to secure release.
Criminal law – Identification evidence and recent possession – Cattle theft; Sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act 1972, sections 2 & 3 – juveniles and custodial sentences; Appeal – conviction upheld, sentence quashed for being illegal/excessive for a juvenile.
|
19 March 1996 |
| January 1996 |
|
|
Conviction for obtaining goods by false pretence quashed for defective charge particulars and reliance on inadmissible hearsay.
Criminal law – Obtaining goods by false pretence (s.302 Penal Code) – Particulars of charge must specify the false representation – Hearsay and the "horse's mouth" rule – Need to call alleged authorizing third party or admit evidence under s.192(3) Criminal Procedure Act – Conviction unsafe if founded on inadmissible hearsay.
|
30 January 1996 |
|
Appellants’ robbery-with-violence convictions upheld; illegal 15-year terms replaced by statutory 30-year minimum sentences.
Criminal law – robbery with violence – sufficiency of evidence and credibility findings; Criminal procedure – deference to trial court on demeanour assessments; Sentencing – illegality of sentences below statutory minimum and substitution with prescribed minimum term.
|
23 January 1996 |