|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2013 |
|
|
A non-owner cannot claim demolition or mesne profits for a road-reserve encroachment; removal is for TANROADS.
Land law – road reserve – encroachment by private structure – measurements and locus in quo; Proprietary interest and locus standi – a non-owner cannot sue for demolition or mesne profits in respect of a road-reserve strip; Mesne profits/special damages – must be properly pleaded and supported by evidence; Public authority role – removal/enforcement of road-reserve encroachments lies with TANROADS, not private litigation.
|
16 December 2013 |
|
Conviction on circumstantial evidence is unsafe unless it irresistibly points to the applicant's guilt; suspicion alone is insufficient.
Criminal law – Circumstantial evidence must irresistibly point to guilt; suspicion is inadequate for conviction – Duty to call key witnesses (victim) – Principles for safe conviction on circumstantial proof.
|
1 December 2013 |
|
Appellant's admission of facts made his guilty plea unequivocal; conviction and minimum 30-year sentence upheld.
* Criminal law – plea of guilty – equivocal plea – proper plea-taking procedure required (charge read and explained, facts stated, accused given opportunity to admit or dispute). * Conviction on own plea – admission of facts supports plea and conviction. * Sentencing – statutory minimum sentence lawful and within court's discretion.
|
1 December 2013 |
|
Appellants convicted of housebreaking, theft and malicious damage based on victims’ testimony and ordered to repay and compensate.
* Criminal law – trespass, housebreaking, stealing and malicious damage – reliance on victim and spouse testimony; identification and credibility issues. * Sentencing – concurrent terms and orders for restitution and compensation.
|
1 December 2013 |
|
Conviction in absentia overturned where accused wasn’t allowed to show cause and prosecution failed to call key witnesses.
Criminal law – conviction in absentia – duty to afford accused opportunity to show cause upon apprehension (s.227 CPA; Art.13(6)(a)) – failure to call material witnesses and investigator – adverse inference – inadmissibility/unreliability of unproduced confession (s.27(2) Evidence Act) – erroneous charging provision curable (s.388 CPA).
|
1 December 2013 |
|
Penetration was not proved so rape failed; court considered conviction for grievous sexual abuse based on medical and lay evidence.
Criminal law — Rape — Penetration an essential element under s.130(4)(a); absence of penetration defeats rape charge — Substitution to lesser offence (grievous sexual abuse) under s.138C(1)(a) and (2)(b) where victim is under eighteen — Admissibility/weight of lay evidence of semen/discharge and role of medical evidence; absence of cautioned/confessional statement.
|
1 December 2013 |
|
Whether the applicant’s proximity and parked motorcycle sufficiently identify him as an aider in an armed robbery.
Criminal law – Armed robbery (s.287A Penal Code) – Identification evidence at night – Aiding and abetting/participation (s.22(1)(b) Penal Code) – Reliance on proximity and circumstances – Corroboration of caution statements.
|
1 December 2013 |
| November 2013 |
|
|
Appeal dismissed as time-barred where decree availability was unproven and no extension to file was sought.
Civil procedure — limitation of actions — computation of time for appeal — availability/certification of judgment and decree — duty to apply for extension where decree availability disputed — requirement to prove registry delay.
|
29 November 2013 |
|
Respondent’s long possession and sale documentation established title; appellant failed to prove ownership.
Land law – ownership, burden of proof – sale agreement and village acknowledgment – long undisturbed occupation – adverse possession; appellate deference on findings of fact; assessors’ opinions under section 24 of the Land Disputes Courts Act; inadmissibility of raising new issues/res judicata on second appeal.
|
28 November 2013 |
|
|
27 November 2013 |
|
Conviction for possession of recently stolen property upheld, but custodial sentence quashed because juvenile sentencing under the Law of the Child Act was not followed.
* Criminal law – possession of recently stolen property; doctrine of recent possession where property is found in suspect's custody and identified as victim's. * Sentencing – juvenile offenders – Law of the Child Act 2009 s.4(1) definition of child and s.116(1) juvenile disposal options (conditional discharge/recognizance). * Procedure – obligation of trial courts to apply statutory juvenile sentencing safeguards and avoid exposing children to adult incarceration.
|
1 November 2013 |
| October 2013 |
|
|
Applicant failed to prove underpayment, breach or discriminatory treatment; CMA decision confirmed and revision dismissed.
Labour law – burden of proof in employment disputes (other than unfair termination) lies with complainant; discrimination – prima facie case required under ELRA and ILO Convention No.111 before burden shifts; not all unfair differentiation amounts to prohibited discrimination; requirement to produce contracts, specified sums and comparative data to substantiate underpayment/promotional claims.
|
30 October 2013 |
|
The applicant's conviction was quashed because identification evidence failed to meet the Waziri Amani standard.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – applicability of Waziri Amani test; Visual identification versus voice identification; Burden of proof – prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; Hearsay evidence – inadmissibility/insufficiency to sustain conviction.
|
2 October 2013 |
|
Conviction for armed robbery quashed due to defective admission of caution statement, unreliable identification, and sentencing error.
* Criminal law – Armed robbery – Identification evidence – adequacy and contradictions; credibility of witnesses.
* Criminal procedure – Admission of caution statement – requirement to allow accused to state objection before tendering exhibit.
* Criminal sentencing – Mandatory sentence for armed robbery – misdirection by trial court where lesser sentence imposed.
|
2 October 2013 |
| August 2013 |
|
|
Insanity cannot be raised for the first time on appeal absent trial indications; inadequate factual basis for guilty plea led to quashing of conviction.
Criminal law – guilty plea – adequacy of factual basis for plea; Criminal Procedure Act s.220(1) – inquiry into insanity – requirement of grounds during trial; Appeal – raising insanity for first time on appeal.
|
29 August 2013 |
|
Appeal allowed: convictions quashed due to insufficient evidence and inadequate consideration of the appellants' defence.
National Parks offences – unlawful entry, hunting and possession of trophies; burden of proof – prosecution must disprove accused’s innocent explanation; evaluation of defence – duty to fairly consider unrepresented accused’s account; evidentiary sufficiency – failure to call local/community witnesses can raise reasonable doubt; procedural requirements for transfer of economic/organized crime matters.
|
26 August 2013 |
| July 2013 |
|
|
Whether a Resident Magistrate in 2007 could act as a justice of the peace to validly record a confession and what minimum safeguards are required.
• Criminal procedure – admissibility of extra‑judicial/confessional statements – whether judicial officer who recorded statement was empowered as a justice of the peace (Magistrates' Courts Act ss.51,52,57,58). • Statutory interpretation – Resident/Primary/ District Court magistrates and appointment/assignment as justices of the peace. • Evidence – no single prescribed form for recorded confessions but minimum procedural safeguards and record‑keeping required to establish voluntariness.
|
22 July 2013 |
|
Whether dying declarations and circumstantial evidence constituted a prima facie case requiring the accused to answer murder charges.
Criminal law – No case to answer – Bhatt test for prima facie case; Evidence – Dying declarations and requirement (and degree) of corroboration; Circumstantial evidence – possession of victim's property, failure to answer alarm, flight on arrest as corroborative indicators; Elements of murder – non‑natural death, causation and intent.
|
17 July 2013 |
| March 2013 |
|
|
Court held Plot No.1A existed, is the same as Plot No.2B, and dismissed appeals for lack of merit.
Land law – disputed plot identity – whether Plot No.1A and Plot No.2 Block B are the same – documentary evidence (receipts, Letter of Offer) and committee proceedings supporting alteration of plot number – Tribunal’s finding not speculative.
|
15 March 2013 |
|
A voluntary cautioned confession was admissible, but a co-accused cannot be convicted solely on another’s repudiated confession without corroboration.
* Criminal law – Murder – Evidence – Admissibility of cautioned statement – voluntariness tested by trial-within-trial.
* Evidence – Repudiated/confession of an accused implicating co-accused – requires independent corroboration; cannot alone ground conviction (s.33 Evidence Act).
* Criminal procedure – Chargesheet sufficiency – omission of "jointly and together" not fatal; common intention requirements reiterated.
|
11 March 2013 |
|
Relative eyewitness identification corroborated by post‑mortem sufficed to convict despite an unsupported alibi; death sentence imposed.
Criminal law – murder – eyewitness identification by relatives at close range and in daylight; weight of uncorroborated but credible direct evidence; corroboration by post-mortem and scene exhibits; alibi notice under s.194(4) Criminal Procedure Act; inference of malice aforethought from persistent, targeted attack with a lethal weapon; delay in prosecution not automatically fatal to prosecution case.
|
8 March 2013 |
| January 2013 |
|
|
Appellate courts must consider long uninterrupted possession; failure to do so justified allowing appellant to remain in possession.
Land law – possession and ownership – long and uninterrupted occupation as evidence of possession; onus on claimant to prove non-abandonment; appellate review for failure to direct on material factual issues; unprosecuted allegations of conspiracy do not overturn possession findings.
|
23 January 2013 |