Results.
12 judgments found.
|
|
|
| December 1965 |
|
|
High Court lacks jurisdiction to grant divorce to a petitioner domiciled in England after Zambia's independence.
-
Family law — Divorce jurisdiction — Domicile as determinant of divorce jurisdiction — Zambia Independence Act 1964 (ss.1,2,7) — effect on Colonial and Other Territories (Divorce Jurisdiction) Acts — continuity provisions and Orders in Council — Mountbatten v Mountbatten; Hilton v Hilton.
|
15 December 1965 |
|
Whether an approved school order authorises detention outside an approved school and thereby supports an escape charge.
-
Juvenile law — Approved school orders — Approved school order authorises detention only in an approved school; Juveniles Ordinance s.76 and s.77(2) — Temporary orders after confirmation limited to escort or similar temporary purposes; Criminal law — Escape from lawful custody (Penal Code s.101) — detention in remand home pending vacancy not lawful custody under approved school order.
|
3 December 1965 |
| November 1965 |
|
|
Notice under s.211 is not required for a s.210(1) charge of causing death by dangerous driving.
-
Road traffic law — causing death by reckless or dangerous driving (s.210) — notice of intended prosecution (s.211) not required — s.210(2) construed.
|
18 November 1965 |
|
An authorised officer may quash a native court's verdict but cannot commit the accused to a magistrate for sentencing.
-
Native courts — jurisdiction — offences under native customary law; authorised officer’s appellate powers — s.40(1)(f) — quashing verdicts; transfer/commitment to subordinate/magistrate court for sentence; validity of warrant of imprisonment after quashing.
|
4 November 1965 |
| October 1965 |
|
|
Ambiguous remark did not corroborate juvenile accomplices; appellate court re-heard facts and acquitted the appellant.
-
Appellate review of facts — duty to re-hear and weigh credibility; Ambiguous confessions — not corroboration; Receiving stolen property — accused's explanation relevant; Caution with uncorroborated accomplice testimony (juvenile witnesses).
|
27 October 1965 |
|
A machine can be 'dangerous' objectively, but guards need not prevent deliberate disobedience; greasers governed by specific regulations.
-
Factories and shops — safety regulations — 'dangerous' machine: objective test; 'efficient guard' need not guard against deliberate defiance; greaser regulated by specific provisions (regs 21, 22); statutes construed together; penal provisions construed toward leniency.
|
21 October 1965 |
| September 1965 |
|
|
Whether an association had ceased to operate (relieving contractual payments) depends on continuation of a substantial degree of its functions, and the defendant bore the burden to prove cessation.
-
Companies — Association — whether it has 'ceased to operate' judged by continuation of substantial functions; Contract — condition subsequent — burden on party disputing liability to prove occurrence; Evidence — proof required to show transfer of functions to a new association.
|
9 September 1965 |
| August 1965 |
|
|
Res judicata and issue estoppel bar re‑litigation of alimony capacity; mere continued capital decline did not justify variation.
-
Civil procedure — res judicata and issue estoppel apply to alimony and variation proceedings; Family law — alimony variation requires material change in income, resources, capital or expenditure.
|
18 August 1965 |
|
Juvenile adults (19–21) cannot be committed to reformatories; section 24 Penal Code cannot expand statutory punishments.
-
Criminal law — Sentencing — limits of section 24 Penal Code; Juveniles Ordinance — reformatory orders — juvenile adults not liable; Statutory interpretation — implication of provisions from definitions.
|
18 August 1965 |
| July 1965 |
|
|
Petitioner must prove grave, health‑threatening cruelty to a high standard; decree nisi granted but decree absolute deferred pending welfare inquiry for children.
-
Family law — Divorce — Cruelty: petitioner must prove cruelty to a standard akin to proof beyond reasonable doubt; cruelty must be grave and weighty and cause injury to health or reasonable apprehension thereof; welfare and custody considerations may delay decree absolute.
|
12 July 1965 |
| June 1965 |
|
|
A guilty plea must admit each element of the offence; equivocal admissions require judicial inquiry and may necessitate retrial.
-
Criminal law — guilty plea — plea must admit every ingredient of the offence — magistrate’s duty to elicit clear admissions — equivocal answers require elaboration — withdrawal of guilty plea before sentence lies in court’s discretion.
|
2 June 1965 |
|
Costs on acquittal are compensatory; cannot be ordered against a complainant if the public prosecutor assumed charge or the complainant wasn't heard.
-
Criminal procedure — costs on acquittal — jurisdiction where public prosecutor has assumed charge — requirement to hear person before ordering costs — costs against State exceptional and compensatory; factors for assessing reasonable costs.
|
1 June 1965 |