|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| July 2012 |
|
|
Accused of aggravated defilement failed to show exceptional circumstances or adequate sureties; bail denied.
Criminal procedure – Bail pending trial – Aggravated defilement – Section 15 Trial on Indictment Act requiring exceptional circumstances for bail in serious offences; factors: fixed abode, adequate sureties, prior bail compliance, risk of absconding; insufficiency of uncorroborated affidavit evidence.
|
30 July 2012 |
|
Vehicle owner held liable via imputed/implied agency; general damages reduced for unsupported permanent disability finding.
Tort — Motor-vehicle accidents — Owner liability for driver’s negligence — imputed or implied agency; Pleadings — failure to plead vicarious liability not necessarily fatal where evidence shows implied agency; Damages — appellate interference justified where award is inordinately excessive and not supported by medical evidence.
|
30 July 2012 |
|
Conspiracy convictions quashed where prosecution failed to prove agreement and exhibits were undermined by material inconsistencies.
Criminal law – Conspiracy (s.390 Penal Code) – requirement of agreement/meeting of minds and shared intention; undercover participation and mens rea; evidential integrity and chain of custody of digital exhibits (keyloggers); material contradictions undermining conviction.
|
27 July 2012 |
|
|
26 July 2012 |
|
Appeal allowed: judgment set aside for defective service, denial of hearing and unproven special damages; retrial ordered.
Local government law – liability of County Resistance Council members – official/agent status and personal liability; Civil procedure – service of process – adequacy of affidavit of service and requirement to serve each defendant; Right to fair hearing – proceeding ex parte, denial of legal representation and failure to allow defence to call witnesses; Evidence – special damages must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved; Remedy – set aside judgment and order retrial.
|
24 July 2012 |
|
Appeal dismissed; the trial court's decision on land distribution upheld, no miscarriage of justice in locus in quo procedures.
Land Law - distribution of intestate estate - authority to distribute estate - court procedure at the locus in quo
|
24 July 2012 |
|
Minister’s late tribunal appointment and absence of lead counsel rendered the inquiry void and violated natural justice.
Administrative law — Judicial review; mandatory jurisdictional time‑limits under s.14 Local Governments Act; tribunal constitution ultra vires. Natural justice — right to fair hearing; requirement for impartial tribunal and need for lead counsel to avoid combined investigator/adjudicator role. Evidence — inadmissibility of hearsay affidavits and significance of errors on the record. Remedies — certiorari, declarations, injunction and costs.
|
24 July 2012 |
|
Court upheld the deceased's Will; found no forgery, probate fraud; and ruled property not in Will follows intestacy rules.
Succession law – Validity of Will – Allegations of forgery – Probate and administration rights – Beneficiary entitlements.
|
19 July 2012 |
|
Specific performance granted where purchaser paid substantially and vendor absconded; Registrar ordered to issue special title certificate.
Land law – sale of land – equitable proprietary interest on part performance; specific performance as equitable remedy; ordering Registrar of Titles to issue Special Certificate where vendor absconds; damages and interest for breach.
|
18 July 2012 |
|
Children and Family Court lacks jurisdiction over land disputes; order set aside and parties directed to a competent forum.
* Jurisdiction – Children and Family Court – Whether such court may determine land disputes – limits of jurisdiction.* Civil procedure – Proper forum for land disputes – LC Court, Magistrate’s Court or High Court depending on value and nature.* Costs – refusal to award costs where parties are family and lay litigants appearing without counsel.
|
18 July 2012 |
|
Appeal allowed: prosecution failed to prove theft and destruction of evidence beyond reasonable doubt; convictions quashed.
Criminal law – Theft from motor vehicle (s.267(c)) – Destruction of evidence (s.102) – Standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt – Appellate re-evaluation of evidence – Admission and reliability of identification parade evidence – Inconsistent prosecution testimony and lack of corroboration.
|
18 July 2012 |
|
High Court set aside magistrate’s defective judgment for delegating adjudication to clan elders and remitted the record for determination.
Civil procedure – Revision under S.83 CPA – Trial Magistrate’s failure to exercise jurisdiction by delegating adjudication to clan elders – Defective judgment/decree – Remittal to another Grade One Magistrate to decide on evidence already on record; customary land – jurisdiction of Magistrate under S.270(2) Magistrates’ Court Act.
|
13 July 2012 |
|
Where an application is withdrawn by consent without a hearing, each party is to bear its own costs.
Civil procedure – withdrawal of application by consent – costs – leave to appeal – precedent for costs where application not tried.
|
13 July 2012 |
|
Court consolidated three related suits and entered judgment on admission based on Auditor-General verification, directing payment through the liquidator.
* Civil Procedure – Consolidation of suits – Order 11 Rule 1 – suits raising same or similar questions of law or fact. * Civil Procedure – Judgment on admissions – Order 13 Rule 6 – effect of unambiguous admission. * Evidence/Procedure – Auditor General’s verification under consent order treated as admission. * Payment of judgment sums – lawyers’ fees assessment and payment; use of Official Receiver/Liquidator for distribution.
|
13 July 2012 |
|
Circumstantial evidence, recent possession and a corroborated retracted confession upheld convictions for breaking and theft.
* Criminal law – Breaking into a building – opening by unlocking with keys constitutes "breaking" (Penal Code ss. 298, 294).
* Criminal law – Theft – circumstantial evidence and recent possession of stolen property may establish guilt absent eyewitnesses.
* Evidence – Extra‑judicial confession – trial within a trial, retracted confessions may be relied upon if corroborated and found true.
* Appeals – First appellate court duty to re‑evaluate record and weigh circumstantial evidence.
|
13 July 2012 |
|
Registrar lacked jurisdiction to record a consent judgment contrary to a High Court order; the consent judgment was set aside and paid monies ordered refunded.
Civil procedure — Consent judgments — Validity and finality of consent orders; limited grounds for setting aside (illegality) — Jurisdiction of Registrar to enter consent judgment where High Court ordered re-transfer and hearing before Magistrate Grade 1 — Repayment of monies paid under illegal consent order.
|
13 July 2012 |
|
Non-registration of caveat by Registrar did not entitle compensation due to prior loss through court order.
Land law – Registration of Titles – Non-registration of a caveat – Compensation under Registration of Titles Act.
|
13 July 2012 |
|
Statutory vesting under s.19 URA Act conferred proprietary rights; subsequent improper allocation to respondent was void.
* Property law – statutory vesting under section 19 URA Act – effect of vesting and exceptions.
* Possession and proprietary interest – sitting tenant rights; whether property was offered for sale.
* Allocation of Government property – validity, authority to allocate and availability for allocation.
* Fraud and allocation – standard of proof required; influence peddling distinguished from fraud.
* Appeal – errors of law and fact by trial Magistrate; appellate reconsideration of possession and statutory vesting.
|
12 July 2012 |
|
Court granted stay of execution, requiring court-approved security, because triable issues and risk of irreparable harm were shown.
Stay of execution under O.43 r.4(3) CPR; propriety of application and pleading; court-determined security for due performance; stay granted where triable issues and risk of irreparable harm to public institution.
|
11 July 2012 |
|
Temporary injunction refused where disputed land had been registered in respondent’s name and damages were adequate remedy.
* Civil procedure – Temporary injunction – purpose to preserve status quo pending final determination – injunction unavailable where registration completed.
* Property/land law – registration of title – completed survey and issuance of certificate of title affects availability of interlocutory relief.
* Remedies – adequacy of damages as alternative to injunctive relief.
* Evidence – affidavit supporting interlocutory application and deponent’s description noted.
|
9 July 2012 |
|
High Court held LC.II lacked jurisdiction in customary land dispute; lower judgments annulled and retrial ordered.
Revision; jurisdiction of Local Council courts; village LC as court of first instance for customary land disputes; statutory jurisdiction; nullity ab initio; annulment of subsequent orders; retrial ordered.
|
9 July 2012 |
|
The application was dismissed because the foundational consent judgment was found not to originate from the court and appeared forged, constituting abuse of process.
* Judicial review – third party agency notice – freeze of bank accounts – reliance on alleged consent judgment purportedly exempting compensation from tax – authenticity of judicial records. * Forgery and abuse of process – court may dismiss proceedings founded on forged judgment. * Civil procedure – misjoinder – unnecessary joinder of departmental official not fatal to application.
|
9 July 2012 |
|
An LC.II court acted without jurisdiction under the Local Courts Act; its judgment was quashed and retrial ordered.
* Local Courts Act 2006 – jurisdiction of local council courts – LC.I as courts of first instance where local council courts have jurisdiction; LC.II acting without jurisdiction renders its decision a nullity.
* Civil procedure – revision – quashing of decisions made by courts lacking jurisdiction.
* Remedy – setting aside invalid judgment and ordering retrial in competent court.
|
9 July 2012 |
|
Judicial review for certiorari dismissed as time‑barred under Rule 5 for failure to seek extension.
* Judicial review – Time limits – Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009, Rule 5 – applications must be made promptly and within three months unless extended; certiorari grounds arise on date of judgment (Rule 5(2)).
* Certiorari – Date of impugned judgment fixes limitation period.
* Extension of time – absence of application for extension precludes consideration of merits where delay is inordinate.
* Procedural bar – time‑bar as ground for striking out judicial review application.
|
9 July 2012 |
|
Revision is inappropriate to set aside an ex parte judgment or res judicata dismissal absent jurisdictional error.
* Civil procedure – Revision under s.83 CPA – limited to jurisdictional errors, failure to exercise jurisdiction, or illegal/materially irregular exercise causing injustice. * Civil procedure – Setting aside ex parte judgments/decrees – Order 9 r.12 and r.27 CPR; requirements include proof of improper service or sufficient cause for non-appearance. * Res judicata – dismissal for res judicata by a court with jurisdiction is not revisable absent jurisdictional error.
|
9 July 2012 |
|
Employees dismissed in restructuring were not entitled to a later retirement scheme; claim dismissed with costs, admitted unpaid sums payable.
* Employment law – redundancy and retrenchment – lawfulness of termination during restructuring – applicability of standing orders versus ad hoc retirement scheme.
* Entitlement to retirement/retrenchment benefits – temporal application and qualifying criteria under standing orders.
* Alleged discrimination in selection for termination – requirement of objective criteria and proof.
|
9 July 2012 |
|
A director who withdraws company funds without colour of right is guilty of embezzlement; patterned transfers supported conspiracy convictions.
* Company law – Certificate of incorporation prima facie valid; incorporation not set aside absent proof of fraud. * Embezzlement – Director and sole signatory who withdraws company funds without colour of right is guilty of embezzlement under s.19 ACA. * Conspiracy to defraud – Agreement, deceitful documentation and patterned transfers permit conviction; circumstantial banking and audit evidence admissible to infer participation. * Defence of marriage/claim of right rejected where funds belong to separate corporate entity.
|
6 July 2012 |
|
JSC must afford a judge a fair opportunity to respond before recommending tribunal appointment; non-notification was error but not fatal.
* Constitutional law – removal of judges – article 144(4) – JSC’s advisory role to the President – procedure to be followed before representation; natural justice obligations. * Administrative law – fair hearing – application of principles of natural justice where no statutory procedure prescribed; written response may suffice. * Judicial conduct – alleged bias/conflict of interest of commission members – high threshold for disqualification. * Procedural fairness – failure to notify affected judge of JSC decision – error but not necessarily fatal.
|
5 July 2012 |
|
Revision refused: successor Magistrate had jurisdiction and a non‑party cannot obtain substantive title relief by revisional application.
Land law; jurisdiction of successor Magistrate to conclude District Land Tribunal matters; revisional powers under s.83 CPA; non-party standing in revision; inadmissibility of fresh evidence and substantive title claims by revision; prejudice from delay.
|
5 July 2012 |
|
Consent judgment set aside due to lack of authority of signatories and attempt to defeat prior valid court judgment.
Civil procedure – Consent judgment – Locus standi – Validity of consent – Authority to sign on behalf of institution – Effect of fraud and abuse of court process – Setting aside consent judgments.
|
4 July 2012 |
|
A timely-filed defence is valid though service on the plaintiff may be effected later; delayed service does not void filing.
Civil procedure – Filing v service of pleadings – Order 8 r.1, r.8 and r.19 and Order 9 r.1 – Filing complete on delivery to court; service on opposite party not time‑barred by those rules; counterclaim exception; fair hearing and remedies (default judgment, court‑ordered service).
|
4 July 2012 |
|
Appeal dismissed: conviction for obtaining money by false pretences upheld where seller knowingly misrepresented a sale as a tenancy.
Criminal law – obtaining money by false pretences – mens rea (intention to deceive) – characterization of transaction documents; Evidence – credibility and corroboration; Appellate review – section 34 CPC and deference to trial court’s assessment of witnesses; Illiteracy and use of interpreter in transactions – effect on consent and misrepresentation.
|
3 July 2012 |
|
Demolition under a court warrant was lawful where an undisputed survey showed the plaintiff’s structure encroached on the decree-holder’s land; suit dismissed.
Land law – execution of court decree and warrant – scope of authority to remove trespassers and illegal structures; encroachment established by survey; rights of kibanja holder/administrator despite expired head lease; demolition lawful when to give vacant possession to decree-holder.
|
3 July 2012 |
|
An accused charged with treason may be granted bail where health, residence, sureties and completed investigations mitigate flight risk.
* Criminal law – Bail – Treason – balancing right to liberty and national security – factors: risk of absconding, interference with evidence, seriousness of offence, period on remand, health, fixed abode, credible sureties, committal for trial indicating investigations complete.
|
3 July 2012 |
|
Filing a defence with the court completes filing; serving the plaintiff need not occur within the filing period.
* Civil procedure — Filing versus service of defence — Order 8 r1 and Order 9 r1 govern filing; service on opposite party not a prerequisite within filing period.
* Civil procedure — Default judgment — Failure to serve a filed defence on the plaintiff within the filing period does not automatically warrant default judgment.
* Civil procedure — Counterclaims and service on non-parties — distinct rules (Order 8 r8–9 and Order 5 r1) prescribe service timing.
* Pleadings — Service should be effected within a reasonable time or as directed by court.
|
3 July 2012 |