|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2014 |
|
|
|
22 December 2014 |
|
|
22 December 2014 |
|
An 18-year manslaughter sentence was manifestly excessive; appellate court reduced it to 12 years from date of conviction.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Manslaughter – Whether 18-year sentence manifestly excessive – Mitigating factors: youth, first offender, time on remand – Appellate interference with sentence.
|
18 December 2014 |
|
The appellant's conviction for aggravated defilement was upheld, but a manifestly excessive 30-year sentence was reduced to 12 years.
Criminal law – aggravated defilement – identification by child victim – medical corroboration; alibi – burden and proof of alibi; appellate review of credibility findings; sentencing – manifestly excessive sentence, mitigation, and credit for time on remand; appellate power to substitute sentence under section 11 Judicature Act.
|
18 December 2014 |
|
|
18 December 2014 |
|
Appellate court reduced appellant's 22-year murder sentence to 20 years, giving weight to remand and mitigation.
Criminal law – Murder – Sentencing – Whether sentence manifestly excessive – Appellate interference with sentencing discretion – Weight of mitigating factors including time on remand and first-offender status versus aggravating factor of killing one’s infant child.
|
18 December 2014 |
|
Appellate court reduced an excessive 19-year defilement sentence to 15 years, crediting remand and first-offender mitigation.
Criminal law – Defilement – Sentencing – Whether sentence manifestly excessive – Appellate interference where trial court ignores material mitigation – Credit for pre-trial remand – First offender status – Aggravating factor: victim aged 4.
|
18 December 2014 |
|
|
18 December 2014 |
|
Twenty-year sentence for first-time simple robbery was excessive; reduced to 12 years and compensation order set aside.
* Criminal law – robbery – sentencing – whether 20-year sentence for simple robbery was excessive and subject to appellate variation. * Sentencing guidelines and precedents – need for consistency and consideration of offender status and mitigating factors. * Compensation under s.286(4) Penal Code Act – requirement of evidence of injury or loss and fair hearing before ordering compensation. * Appellate review – interference justified where sentence is manifestly harsh, wrong principle applied, or material factors overlooked.
|
18 December 2014 |
|
Circumstantial evidence sufficed to uphold a defilement conviction, but life sentence was reduced to 18 years as excessive.
Criminal law – circumstantial evidence – sufficiency to sustain conviction; medical evidence in sexual offences; sentencing – interpretation of "life imprisonment" and appropriate mitigation; obligation to test victims for HIV where exposure is alleged.
|
18 December 2014 |
|
Conviction based mainly on unproven sniffer-dog evidence was unsafe; appellant acquitted and released.
Criminal law – Evidentiary admissibility and weight of sniffer/tracker dog evidence – prerequisites: handler’s training and association, dog’s training and reliability, trail circumstances and scene preservation – treat with caution; Circumstantial evidence and alibi – adequacy to exclude reasonable doubt; Criminal procedure – trial hearing and disposal by single judge under section 20 Judicature Act.
|
18 December 2014 |
|
|
18 December 2014 |
|
Failure to consider mitigating factors and long pre-trial detention rendered the death sentence excessive; appellate court substituted 18 years imprisonment.
Criminal law – murder – sentencing – scope of Article 23(8) (pre-trial detention) – mitigating factors (first offender, age, remand period) – appellate power to substitute sentence under section 11 Judicature Act.
|
18 December 2014 |
|
|
18 December 2014 |
|
A single identifying witness can safely support conviction if conditions favour recognition; sentence reduced for ignoring remand and mitigation.
* Criminal law – Visual identification – Reliance on single identifying witness – Court must evaluate conditions (light, distance, familiarity, duration) and warn of danger of mistaken identity.* Criminal law – Alibi – Appellate court must evaluate both prosecution and defence versions and give reasons for preferring one over the other.* Sentencing – Appellate interference – Trial court must consider remand period (Constitution art.23(8)) and allow mitigation (Trial on Indictments Act s.98); failure justifies reduction of sentence.
|
18 December 2014 |
|
Appellate court upheld an unequivocal guilty plea despite omitted language record and affirmed lawful life sentence.
Criminal procedure – Guilty plea – Equivocal plea and requirements for recording plea; requirement to explain charge in a language the accused understands (Article 28(3)(b)); conviction under s.63 Trial on Indictments Act; sentencing – life imprisonment for murder lawful; appellate interference with sentence only where manifestly excessive or wrong in principle.
|
18 December 2014 |
|
Admission of absent witnesses' statements and medical reports without cross‑examination violated the appellant's right to a fair trial.
* Criminal law – Defilement – Admissibility of absent witnesses’ statements and medical reports – Evidence Act (direct evidence, s.30(b)/s.59) – Right to fair trial (Art.28(3)(g), Art.44(c)) – Cross‑examination essential – Trial nullity where statutory procedure not followed.
|
18 December 2014 |
|
|
18 December 2014 |
|
|
17 December 2014 |
|
|
16 December 2014 |
|
Appellant’s murder conviction upheld but reduced to diminished responsibility; life sentence substituted with detention in safe custody.
Criminal law – Murder – Diminished responsibility under section 194 Penal Code Act – necessity of psychiatric examination where lay evidence raises doubt – schizophrenia – sentencing: detention in safe custody under section 194 and section 105 Trial on Indictments Act.
|
8 December 2014 |
|
Appellant’s conviction for kidnap with intent to murder upheld on credible accomplice evidence and corroborative circumstances.
* Criminal law – accomplice evidence – requirement of corroboration as rule of practice – rare occasions where credible accomplice evidence may stand without independent corroboration. * Criminal law – corroboration – independent or circumstantial evidence connecting accused to crime. * Criminal law – alibi – when alibi can be destroyed by prosecution evidence. * Criminal law – ritual killings – circumstantial inference as corroboration. * Appellate procedure – first appeal duty to re-evaluate evidence under Rule 30(1).
|
8 December 2014 |
|
Court found a prima facie case and upheld setting aside of acquittal, ordering retrial before another magistrate.
* Criminal procedure – Prima facie case at close of prosecution – test and appellate review; * Appellate review of trial magistrate’s findings and witness impressions; * Retrial – only in compelling circumstances; * Remand versus reinstatement of bail after acquittal set aside.
|
4 December 2014 |
|
Appellant's conviction upheld on a reliable dying declaration; sentence set aside and reduced to 16 years.
Criminal law – murder – dying declaration under section 30 Evidence Act – admissibility and sufficiency of uncorroborated dying declarations; identification evidence and conditions for correct identification; alibi – duty to give reasons when rejecting; sentencing – necessity to account for remand period (Article 23(8) Constitution) – appellate re-evaluation on first appeal.
|
3 December 2014 |
|
Conviction for defilement upheld despite victim's non‑attendance where eyewitness and medical evidence sufficiently corroborated the offence.
Criminal law – Defilement – sufficiency of indictment particulars; evidence – victim absent due to incapacity; child witness corroboration; requirement for investigating officer to testify; appellate interference with sentence.
|
3 December 2014 |
|
Failure to credit remand time under Article 23(8) renders a custodial sentence illegal; appellate court may resentence.
Constitutional law – Article 23(8): credit for time spent on remand must be taken into account when imposing imprisonment; failure to do so renders the sentence illegal and a nullity; Court of Appeal may entertain illegality under Article 126(2)(e) even if not pleaded; appellate power to set aside and substitute sentence under section 11 Judicature Act; sentencing considerations – aggravating versus mitigating factors (seriousness of rape, deterrence, offender’s age, first offender status, remand custody).
|
3 December 2014 |
|
Appellants who tied and exposed a suspect to a mob were guilty of murder; malice and common intention established.
Criminal law – common intention (s.20 Penal Code Act) – liability for mob action; Malice aforethought – knowledge that act would probably cause death (s.191(b) Penal Code Act); Summing up to assessors – requirement to record substance but omission not automatically fatal; Appellate reappraisal of evidence under Court of Appeal rules.
|
3 December 2014 |
| November 2014 |
|
|
Child eyewitness corroborated; manslaughter conviction upheld, original sentence set aside and reduced to 14 years.
Criminal law – Evidence of child witness – corroboration by lay and medical evidence; absence of post‑mortem not necessarily fatal; manslaughter distinguished from murder; sentencing – failure to consider mitigation and remand credit renders sentence defective.
|
27 November 2014 |
|
Failure to expressly consider remand period under Article 23(8) renders a custodial sentence illegal; Court substituted 12 years.
Constitutional law – Article 23(8) – obligation to take remand period into account when imposing imprisonment; failure to state consideration renders sentence illegal; appellate power to set aside and substitute sentence. Criminal law – manslaughter by a firearms holder – mitigation (youth, first offender, plea) and aggravation (loss of life, misuse of firearm).
|
24 November 2014 |
|
Appellant consents to withdraw appeal against respondents, and parties agree there be no orders as to costs.
Practice and procedure – Withdrawal of appeal by consent – Court recording of consented withdrawal – Parties agree no orders as to costs.
|
21 November 2014 |
|
An appellate court will not disturb a sentence unless a wrong principle was applied, a material factor overlooked, or it is manifestly excessive.
Criminal law — Sentencing discretion — Appellate interference only where trial judge acted on wrong principle, overlooked material factor, or sentence is manifestly excessive; mitigation in sex offences involving very young children; remand time as a factor; respondent cannot seek enhancement without appeal/cross‑appeal.
|
20 November 2014 |
|
Failure to record consideration of remand custody renders a sentence illegal; children must be sentenced by the Family and Children Court.
Constitutional law – Article 23(8): mandatory consideration and recording of remand custody when sentencing; Criminal procedure – sentencing: appellate intervention where trial Judge acts on wrong principle or on unproven facts; Children – sentencing jurisdiction under s.104 of the Children Act; Sentencing principles – aggravating and mitigating factors and remand credit.
|
20 November 2014 |
|
Failure to hold sentencing hearing and to credit remand time renders sentence null; appellate court substituted sentence.
* Criminal law – Sentencing – Requirement to hold a sentencing hearing post-conviction (Kigula) – Failure to hold hearing vitiates sentencing.
* Constitutional law – Article 23(8) – Duty to credit time spent on remand when imposing imprisonment – failure renders sentence null.
* Appellate jurisdiction – Court of Appeal may quash invalid sentence and impose a fresh sentence under section 11 Judicature Act.
* Sentencing considerations – balancing aggravating brutality of killings against mitigating factors (first offender, age, remand period).
|
20 November 2014 |
|
Court reduced 20-year aggravated robbery sentences to 13 and 12 years, crediting remand and mitigating factors.
Criminal law – Aggravated robbery – Sentence – Manifestly excessive – Credit for time on remand – Mitigating factors (youth, first offender, no physical injury) v. aggravating factors (use of firearm, appellant a soldier).
|
20 November 2014 |
|
Court found respondent in contempt for executing a decree despite an appellate stay, sentencing him to imprisonment and a fine.
* Civil procedure – Stay of execution – scope of stay (whole decree versus physical eviction); * Contempt of court – disobedience of interim order; * Execution procedure – requirement for inventory, verification and police safeguards; * Effectiveness of court orders – orders in rem take effect when pronounced; * Natural justice – requirement to hear alleged contemnors before punishment.
|
20 November 2014 |
|
Application for stay of execution dismissed for failure to show reasonable grounds; costs awarded to respondent.
Stay of execution – interlocutory relief pending appeal – requirement to show reasonable grounds – application dismissed – costs awarded to respondent.
|
20 November 2014 |
|
|
19 November 2014 |
|
Court held LCII has original jurisdiction in land matters but set aside LCII judgment as the council was not validly constituted.
Local council courts – jurisdiction in land disputes – parish/ward (LCII) as court of first instance; Appeals – requirement for statutory leave; Court of Appeal’s power under Rule 42 to grant leave on its own motion; Validity of LC courts’ decisions where councils were not lawfully constituted (Ruranga).
|
10 November 2014 |
|
Whether the death sentence was manifestly excessive given mitigating factors and the consistency principle.
Criminal law – Murder – Sentencing – Death penalty discretionary, confined to the "rarest of the rare" – Sentencing Guidelines and Law Revision Act – Consistency principle in sentencing – Mitigating and aggravating factors – Appellate interference with sentence – Remand period deduction.
|
7 November 2014 |
| October 2014 |
|
|
Court restrained rival claimants from exercising Powers to preserve neutrality pending appeal and interlocutory proceedings.
Interim injunction – preservation of status quo – cultural/traditional leadership dispute – inherent powers of Court under Rules – mutual restraint of rival claimants pending substantive proceedings.
|
31 October 2014 |
|
|
31 October 2014 |
|
|
29 October 2014 |
|
Failure to produce the Power of Attorney on record defeated the bank's claim of a lawful mortgage over the appellant's land.
Property law – Power of Attorney – strict construction and requirement of primary evidence; Evidence Act – documents must be proved by primary evidence; Registration of Titles – authority to mortgage; Mortgage law – registered mortgage and impeachment; First appeal – duty to reappraise evidence.
|
28 October 2014 |
|
A mortgage cannot be enforced against the applicant without primary evidence of a power of attorney authorising it.
Registration of Titles Act; power of attorney; primary evidence rule (Evidence Act ss.61,63,64); creation and proof of mortgage; agency by power of attorney; necessity to produce instrument authorising encumbrance of registered land.
|
28 October 2014 |
|
Civil Procedure|Injunctions and interdicts|Interlocutory Order
|
14 October 2014 |
|
Land
|
10 October 2014 |
|
|
6 October 2014 |
| September 2014 |
|
|
|
19 September 2014 |
|
Criminal law|Evidence Law
|
11 September 2014 |
|
Constitutional Law|Equality before the law and equal protection of the law|Have his cause heard (fair trial)
|
10 September 2014 |
