|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2002 |
|
|
The applicant’s registered title prevails; the respondent is a trespasser ordered evicted, with damages and costs awarded.
* Land law – registered title (private milo) – certificate of title as exclusive evidence of ownership under the Registration of Titles Act; * Trespass – entry upon registered land without consent constitutes trespass; * Burden of proof – defendant must substantiate claims of customary occupation; * Remedies – eviction, general damages and costs; mesne profits discretionary and not awarded here; * Constitutional/Land Act protections inapplicable to unlawful or non-bonafide occupants.
|
30 December 2002 |
|
Administrative disciplinary process breached Article 42; decisions declared void and applicant awarded terminal benefits, general and punitive damages.
Administrative law – disciplinary procedure – natural justice; Constitutional law – Article 42 right to fair administrative hearing – non-derogable; Remedies – declaration of nullity, restitutional terminal benefits, general and punitive damages; Pleadings – general damages need not be specifically pleaded in constitutional redress; Courts’ power to frame issues and grant relief at judgment.
|
19 December 2002 |
|
Court orders security for costs from foreign respondent with unknown assets and residence; bond of Shs.4,000,000 required.
Security for costs; foreign defendant with no known assets or disclosed residence; discretionary relief; assessment of prima facie merits on pleadings and affidavits; bond of Shs.4,000,000 ordered.
|
15 December 2002 |
|
Strike-out refused: expiry of lease did not defeat a pre-expiry trespass claim or the registered proprietor’s protection under s.56.
Land law – locus standi after lease expiry; pleadings – disclosure of cause of action (Auto Garage test); trespass as continuous tort – acts prior to lease expiry maintainable; certificate of title (s.56 Registration of Titles Act) – conclusive ownership during interim; procedural remedy – dismissal of strike-out application.
|
13 December 2002 |
|
Constitutional equality permits a wife to petition for divorce on adultery; discriminatory Divorce Act provisions are void to that extent.
Divorce law – Adultery – wife’s right to petition on adultery – constitutional equality; Divorce Act (ss.5,6,23) inconsistent with Constitution to extent discriminatory; admissions in pleadings as proof of adultery; custody and welfare of children; costs discretion under Civil Procedure Act s.27.
|
12 December 2002 |
|
Court holds discriminatory Divorce Act provisions inconsistent with the Constitution and grants divorce with mother’s custody and no costs.
* Family law – Divorce – Constitutionality of Divorce Act provisions – Whether sections 5, 6 and 23 are inconsistent with the 1995 Constitution’s equality guarantees.
* Family law – Adultery – admission in pleadings as proof; effect of condonation, collusion and connivance.
* Children – custody, access and maintenance – welfare principle and parties’ agreement.
* Civil procedure – costs – discretion under Civil Procedure Act where both parties are culpable; discriminatory statutory cost provisions void to extent of inconsistency with Constitution.
|
12 December 2002 |
|
Constitutional equality allows a wife to petition for divorce on adultery; discriminatory Divorce Act provisions are void to that extent.
- Constitutional law – equality in marriage – Articles 2, 21, 31, 33, 34 and 273 – effect on Divorce Act provisions; - Family law – divorce by adultery – competency of petition by wife; - Evidence/Civil procedure – admissions in pleadings as proof of adultery; - Statutory invalidity – discriminatory provisions of Divorce Act (s.5, s.6, s.23) void to extent of inconsistency; - Child welfare – custody to mother, reasonable access to father; - Costs – discretion to deny costs where both parties guilty of adultery.
|
12 December 2002 |
|
Accused convicted of rape where prosecutrix, eyewitness and medical evidence proved lack of consent; alibi rejected.
* Criminal law – Rape – Elements: unlawful carnal knowledge and absence of consent – proof required.
* Evidence – Identification and corroboration: prosecutrix's testimony, eyewitness account and medical findings.
* Defence – Alibi – credibility assessment and rejection where inconsistent.
* Procedure – Caution regarding uncorroborated sexual‑offence evidence; conviction may rest on uncorroborated testimony if otherwise reliable.
* Sentence – First offender status weighed against brutality; deterrent term imposed.
|
11 December 2002 |
|
Owner held vicariously liable for driver’s negligent collision; partial special damages, general damages, costs and interest awarded.
Negligence – vehicle driving into private dwelling; Vicarious liability of vehicle owner for driver’s negligence; Proof of special damages — requirement for strict proof and supporting receipts; Assessment and discounting of valuation where receipts absent; Award of general damages, costs and interest.
|
3 December 2002 |
|
Accused convicted of murder; alibi and self-defence rejected and sentenced to death.
* Criminal law – Murder – Eyewitness evidence – credibility and demeanour
* Criminal procedure – Burden of proof – prosecution must disprove alibi beyond reasonable doubt
* Defences – Provocation, self-defence and defence of property not established
* Evidence – Fabricated report to police as indicium of consciousness of guilt
|
2 December 2002 |
| November 2002 |
|
|
Criminal law
|
15 November 2002 |
|
Whether theft and identity were proved for robbery on single-witness identification; acquitted of robbery, convicted of burglary.
* Criminal law – Robbery with aggravation – elements: theft, use/threat of deadly weapon, participation. * Single identifying witness – cautionary rules; identification on balance when conditions favourable (familiarity, lighting, close contact). * Contradictory evidence on theft invalidates robbery conviction; conviction for burglary where entry and assault proved.
|
15 November 2002 |
|
Acquittal where victim's age and intercourse were unproven and confession was uncorroborated despite being admitted.
Criminal law — Defilement — Admissibility of confession: strict compliance with recording directions not always required; admission permissible where contents properly interpreted and no prejudice. Proof of age of complainant — birth certificate and complainant's testimony necessary to establish age beyond reasonable doubt. Confession with material discrepancies unsafe to ground conviction without independent corroboration; mere presence with complainant insufficient corroboration.
|
15 November 2002 |
|
Failure by the appellant to extract the order before appealing rendered the appeal incompetent and was struck out with costs.
Civil procedure – Appeal – Requirement to extract and attach formal decree/order before filing appeal – Jurisdictional defect – Order 18 r.7 CPR – Constitutional discretion (Art.126(2)(e)) insufficient to cure non-extraction – Appeal incompetent and struck out with costs.
|
15 November 2002 |
|
Summary dismissal was wrongful where a suspect should have been suspended under the agreement, entitling the applicant to damages.
Labour law – wrongful summary dismissal – application of written (union) agreement – suspension of a suspect vs summary dismissal; entitlement to terminal (special) benefits; award of general damages for repudiation; interest and costs; refusal to stay civil suit pending criminal proceedings.
|
14 November 2002 |
|
Plaintiff’s suit dismissed because the plaint was filed by a firm lacking a practitioner with a valid practising certificate, rendering proceedings invalid.
* Civil procedure – validity of proceedings – documents prepared or filed by an advocate without a valid practising certificate are invalid and of no legal effect (Professor Syed Huq principle).
* Evidence – proof of practising certificate – use of certified lists and firm registration particulars to establish lack of a practising practitioner.
* Procedure – late-raising of dispositive points of law – court may adjudicate such points; party must apply to rebut or reopen evidence.
* Remedy – invalid plaint renders subsequent proceedings incurably defective; dismissal with costs.
|
12 November 2002 |
|
Prosecution proved defilement beyond reasonable doubt through child testimony and medical corroboration; accused convicted.
* Criminal law – Defilement – elements: unlawful sexual intercourse with a female under eighteen years; proof of age, sexual intercourse and accused’s participation. * Evidence – child witnesses – voir dire to determine competence; unsworn evidence and affirmation. * Medical evidence – corroboration of sexual intercourse by hymenal tear and bruising. * Identity – corroboration by child eyewitness testimony. * Burden of proof – prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
|
12 November 2002 |
|
Licence for access exceeded by defendants; breach proved and modest damages awarded due to limited proof of loss.
Contract — licence for access — whether conduct exceeded licence (access v. access road) — breach established; Damages — requirement to prove quantum, competency of expert valuation and proof of loss; Limitation/Laches — not shown to bar claim.
|
11 November 2002 |
|
Accused convicted of attempted defilement; penetration not proved but attempt and identity established.
Criminal law – Defilement and attempted defilement – Proof of penetration as essential element – Medical evidence (intact hymen and absence of injuries) – Venereal disease not conclusive of sexual intercourse – Identification of accused by young complainant – Reliance on uncorroborated child testimony after judicial warning – Sentence for attempted defilement.
|
11 November 2002 |
|
A notice of motion must comply with Order VI Rule 1(a) and Section 101 cannot substitute for Order 9 Rule 24.
Civil procedure — Notice of motion as a pleading — Order VI Rule 1(a) requirement for summary of evidence, lists of witnesses, documents and authorities — Mandatory language but consequences of non-compliance left to court’s discretion — Need for explanation to permit non-rejection; Improper reliance on Section 101 where Order 9 Rule 24 applies — Dismissal with costs for procedural non-compliance and wrong provision invoked.
|
1 November 2002 |
|
Criminal law
|
1 November 2002 |
| October 2002 |
|
|
Recall by the seconding employer terminates the seconded employee's contract with the host employer; remedy lies against the seconding employer.
Employment law – secondment – recall by seconding employer terminates secondment; host employer not liable for post-recall pay where employee recalled; remedy against seconding employer; failure to give written notice does not keep contract subsisting.
|
29 October 2002 |
|
A principal cannot overturn a registered transfer where a purported revocation of an agent’s power was ineffective and no fraud proved.
Land law – agency and powers of attorney; revocation and notice – revocation ineffective if not properly executed, registered or brought to agent’s attention; registration requirements – non-registration of power of attorney not per se ground to impeach title; transfer effective on registration; fraud – burden to prove transferee’s fraudulent deprivation of proprietor’s title.
|
29 October 2002 |
|
A customary heir without probate or letters of administration cannot validly sell a deceased’s registered land; buyer’s remedy is refund.
Succession law – probate/letters of administration required to establish testamentary or intestate rights; customary heir’s incapacity to convey registered land absent administration; sale of deceased’s land by customary heir void; remedy for buyer is refund with interest; appellate review of magistrate’s erroneous probate-like findings.
|
29 October 2002 |
|
Accused acquitted because prosecution failed to prove lack of consent and complainant's testimony was uncorroborated.
* Criminal law – Rape – Elements: act of intercourse, participation, and lack of consent – burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
* Evidence – Corroboration of complainant in sexual offence cases; uncorroborated testimony and requirement for caution.
* Credibility – Assessment of complainant’s credibility where discrepancies and inconclusive medical evidence exist.
* Medical evidence – Inconclusive examinations due to menstruation and absence of observable injuries does not corroborate allegation of force.
|
24 October 2002 |
|
Prosecution failed to prove robbery beyond reasonable doubt due to grave contradictions and lack of proof of a deadly weapon.
* Criminal law – Robbery – Ingredients: theft of property and use of a deadly weapon – necessity to prove both beyond reasonable doubt; * Evidence – Credibility – substantial contradictions and delays may render witness testimony unreliable; * Evidence – Deadly weapon – non-production/absence of ballistic or descriptive proof may defeat robbery charge; * Circumstantial evidence – purchases and possession must be positively linked to alleged stolen property to corroborate theft.
|
24 October 2002 |
|
Applicants with ten or more years’ service are entitled to pensions under the employer’s scheme; retrenchment packages did not extinguish those rights.
Employment law – Pensions under employer scheme – Standing Instruction No.22 – Pensions are deferred contractual remuneration, not absolute; payable only if scheme conditions met (including ten years' service) and not disqualified for misconduct – Retrenchment/severance package does not extinguish accrued pension rights absent clear agreement or evidence of waiver.
|
24 October 2002 |
|
Court rejected the corroboration rule for complainants in sexual‑offence cases and convicted the accused of defilement.
* Criminal law – Defilement – Elements: age under 18, sexual intercourse, identity of accused – proof beyond reasonable doubt. * Evidence – Rejection of practice requiring corroboration of female complainants; compatibility with Evidence Act s.132. * Constitutional and international law – Non‑discrimination (sex) and CEDAW implications of evidentiary practices. * Proof of age – medical (dental) opinion and relative’s evidence admissible and sufficient in absence of birth certificate. * Identification – recognition at dusk and prior acquaintance can negate risk of mistaken identity.
|
19 October 2002 |
|
Allegation of judicial bias dismissed; judge lawfully limited improper cross‑examination and the accused may discharge counsel but must choose representation.
* Evidence — cross‑examination on prior written statement — document must be available and put to witness (s.143 Evidence Act). * Judicial conduct — judge entitled to refuse improper or irrelevant questions and to ask questions. * Allegations of bias — must be placed on record and determined judicially; tests of real likelihood and reasonable suspicion of bias apply. * Right to legal representation — accused may choose counsel or self‑representation; counsel‑client relationship is contractual and termination at advanced stage of a capital trial is undesirable.
|
18 October 2002 |
|
Applicant's attempt to set aside a consent order for alleged loan repayment dismissed for lack of new evidence.
Civil procedure — Review/application to set aside consent order — Incorrect procedural basis (Order 48 v Order 42) — Requirement of new evidence to reopen consent orders — Uncontested affidavits — Summary decree subsisting and not shown to be satisfied.
|
15 October 2002 |
|
A consent compromise is void where a non‑director without authority negotiated and received its proceeds.
Company law – authority to bind company – change of advocates and settlement – necessity of proper corporate authority or resolution; Civil procedure – consent orders and compromise – validity where negotiated by unauthorised person; Advocate’s authority – actual vs ostensible authority; Voidable/void compromise procured without corporate authority.
|
14 October 2002 |
|
Revocation of NGO registration without hearing breaches Article 42; decision and ministerial confirmation declared null, reinstatement ordered.
Administrative law – Non-governmental organisations – revocation of registration – right to be heard – natural justice – Article 42 Constitution – judicial review – nullity of decision – reinstatement as effective redress.
|
14 October 2002 |
|
A debt‑collection fee agreement lacking the statutory notary certificate is unenforceable; taxation appeal dismissed.
Advocates Act (ss.47,49,50) – fee agreements – statutory requirement for written, signed agreement with notary certificate and copy to Law Council – non-compliance renders agreement unenforceable; debt-collection agreements – whether cover contentious work; taxation of advocate/client bills.
|
3 October 2002 |
|
A remuneration agreement lacking the required notary certificate and Law Council notification is unenforceable; applicant’s taxation claim dismissed.
* Advocates Act (Sections 47, 49, 50) – validity of remuneration agreements – requirement of writing, signature and notary public certificate; copy to Law Council under Decree 1(c).
* Contract/enforceability – debt collection agreement lacking required notarisation is unenforceable.
* Civil procedure – taxation of advocate/client bills – where no enforceable agreement exists, claim to taxation fails.
* Renewal by conduct – letters and conduct do not cure statutory formal defects in advocate remuneration agreements.
|
3 October 2002 |
| September 2002 |
|
|
Carrier strictly liable for loss of checked baggage under Warsaw Convention but recovery limited to $20 per kilogram absent special declaration.
Aviation law – carriage by air – Warsaw Convention Article 18(1) strict liability for loss of checked baggage; Article 22 limitation to US$20 per kg absent special declaration; evidentiary value of ticket, baggage tags and PIR; remedies: limited pecuniary liability, general damages, costs and interest.
|
25 September 2002 |
|
Addendum upheld; the defendant liable for rent arrears and water bills for the tenancy, not for occupier’s post-termination holding over.
Tenancy agreement and Addendum – validity and effect – rent revision after repairs; Rent arrears – quantification; Holding-over – liability requires government authorization/acquiescence; Liability for utilities under tenancy covenant; Quantum of damages and interest; Costs awarded.
|
20 September 2002 |
|
Both the plaintiff's refund claim and the defendant's profit counterclaim were dismissed for lack of proof.
Civil law – joint purchase of vehicle – determination of parties' contributions and possession; registration in one party's name where transfer signed by both and plaintiff lacked PIN; breach of agreement and denial of use require proof; special damages and profit claims must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved with records.
|
18 September 2002 |
|
Plaintiff failed to prove unlawful eviction; defendants lawfully re‑entered premises and suit is dismissed with costs.
Tenancy law – alleged unlawful eviction – burden of proof on the alleging party – Evidence Act ss.100–102; Re‑entry by owner – lawful possession where tenant not in proven possession; Remedies – dismissal and costs where claimant fails to prove breach.
|
13 September 2002 |
|
Civil Procedure
|
12 September 2002 |
|
Close-range identification under torch and moonlight upheld; the accused convicted jointly for murder.
* Criminal law – Murder – essential ingredients: death, unlawful act, malice aforethought, participation. * Evidence – identification: proximity, duration, light (torch and moonlight), familiarity and locus inspection. * Criminal liability – joint offenders/common purpose (section 22 Penal Code). * Forensic evidence – post-mortem corroborating eyewitness accounts.
|
10 September 2002 |
|
A magistrate’s dismissal of an objector without permitting evidence in attachment proceedings is a material procedural irregularity.
* Civil procedure – Revision under s.84 Civil Procedure Act v. appeal – scope of High Court to call records and address substantive justice. * Attachment proceedings – Order 19 r.56 – requirement for objector to adduce evidence of interest/possession. * Procedural fairness – improper reliance on preliminary objection to deny objector opportunity to give evidence – material irregularity and injustice.
|
10 September 2002 |
|
Appellant failed to prove vendor’s title; without a root of title purchaser cannot obtain valid ownership.
Land law – proof of title and root of title – purchaser must trace vendor’s root of title; incomplete transfer documents insufficient to prove sale; a vendor without title cannot pass good title; lease extensions or unauthorised documents do not create registrable title; failure to investigate title is fatal to specific performance claim.
|
5 September 2002 |
|
Contract Law|Breach of Contract
|
5 September 2002 |
| August 2002 |
|
|
Civil Procedure
|
28 August 2002 |
|
Contract Law
|
22 August 2002 |
|
Criminal law
|
21 August 2002 |
|
Criminal law
|
21 August 2002 |
|
Accused convicted of defilement where age, intercourse and identity were proved; sentenced to ten years' imprisonment.
* Criminal law – Defilement (s.123(1) Penal Code Act) – Elements: complainant under 18, sexual intercourse, identification of perpetrator.
* Evidence – Proof of age – lay evidence from relative plus medical examination can establish age in absence of birth certificate.
* Evidence – Extra‑judicial statement/confession – admissible and capable of corroborating complainant's single-witness account.
* Sentence – First offender, remand credit considered; maximum penalty noted but lesser term imposed.
|
21 August 2002 |
|
Criminal law
|
20 August 2002 |
|
Criminal law
|
20 August 2002 |