|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 1968 |
|
|
Accused's silence plus evidence he fired a lethal shot supported an inference of guilt and a murder conviction.
Evidence — Silence of accused — Adverse inference of guilt; Criminal law — Shooting with lethal weapon — Presumption of intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm; Burden of proof — State must prove murder beyond reasonable doubt.
|
21 December 1968 |
|
An incorrect Penal Code citation in the charge (s.248) can be cured by amendment and the appellate court may substitute the correct section (s.243).
Criminal procedure — Statement of offence citing wrong Penal Code section — Whether s.248 (enhanced sentence provision) discloses an offence — Curability by amendment — Appellate power to amend charge to cite s.243.
|
6 December 1968 |
| November 1968 |
|
|
A magistrate must seek clarification or amend a guilty plea where facts differ, and may not acquit under s.189 before trial.
Criminal procedure – Guilty plea – If facts do not support charge, magistrate must seek clarification or amend plea (s.187(2)); acquittal under s.189 only after trial (s.188).
|
29 November 1968 |
|
Prevalence of public servant thefts justifies deterrent sentences; criminal courts must not act as debt collectors.
Criminal procedure — Sentencing: prevalence of offence as factor supporting deterrent punishment; Criminal courts should not impose fines to recover victims' property — compensation governed by sections 162A and 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code; breach of trust by public servant.
|
22 November 1968 |
|
Whether monies accepted by a court clerk in breach of administrative orders constitute theft by a public servant under s248.
Criminal law – Theft by public servant – Penal Code s248 – "came into the possession by virtue of employment" – acceptance in breach of administrative/standing financial orders does not negate s248 liability – plea ambiguity and confession.
|
22 November 1968 |
|
An adult African may validly make a will under the Wills Act, effective despite contrary customary law, and joint administrators were appointed.
Succession – testamentary capacity of adult African; Wills Act 1837 – applicability to Africans; Validity of wills contrary to customary law; Administration of estates – appointment after renunciation by executor.
|
12 November 1968 |
|
Prosecution must rebut a defence raised in a post-incident police statement; onus of proof stays with prosecution.
Criminal procedure – admissibility of post-incident statement as res gestae – defence of mechanical failure – prosecution's duty to negative defence – onus of proof remains with prosecution – trial magistrate's misdirection.
|
1 November 1968 |
|
Failure of local court justices to consider the accused's evidence vitiated the conviction.
Criminal procedure — Local courts — Appellate review without undue technicality but intervention only for miscarriage of justice — Trial justices must consider accused’s evidence or statement (even under customary procedures) — Unsupported factual findings vitiate conviction.
|
1 November 1968 |
| October 1968 |
|
|
An application for Kuta leave to appeal must be made within 30 days; Kuta delay in granting leave does not defeat the appeal.
Local Courts Act s.56A(3) — construction of time limits for appeals from Barotse local courts in land matters; s.57(1)(a) inapplicable to grant of extensions; no inherent judicial power to extend time; application for leave must be made within 30 days.
|
28 October 1968 |
|
An assessor may only advise on customary law in open court; the magistrate alone must make findings, otherwise a re‑hearing is required.
Civil procedure – Local Courts Act s.60 – Assessor’s advice must be given in open court – Assessor limited to advising on customary law – Magistrate alone to make findings of fact and law – Irregular participation by assessor vitiates judgment and requires re‑hearing.
|
16 October 1968 |
|
Provocation reducing murder to manslaughter requires an objective loss of self-control and a reasonably related response.
Criminal law – Murder (Penal Code ss. 177, 180) – Malice aforethought defined; Self-defence limited to necessary force; Provocation (ss. 182–183) – objective test, heat of passion, reasonable relationship to provocation; burden on prosecution to negative provocation.
|
15 October 1968 |
|
A longer criminal record may justify denial of leniency but not a harsher sentence that amounts to double punishment.
Criminal procedure - Sentencing - Prior convictions: may justify denial of leniency but not harsher punishment tantamount to double punishment; disparity between co-accused sentences.
|
4 October 1968 |
|
Where identity is decisive and an identification parade was undisclosed, resulting risk of contamination makes conviction unsafe.
Criminal law – Evidence – Identification parades – Non-disclosure of parade and outcome – Risk of contamination where witnesses saw accused prior to parade – Convictions unsafe.
|
4 October 1968 |
|
Search and seizure under exchange control upheld where statutory regulation, objective suspicion and procedural safeguards are satisfied.
Constitutional law — Chapter III derogations — "law" includes statutory instruments; State bears onus and objective test for "necessary/expedient" and "reasonably required"; "authorised officer" must be specifically appointed; "reasonable suspicion" is objective, directed at a particular postal article and must be communicated to Postmaster-General; exchange control justified as securing development/utilisation of property but not as public safety; sealed postal packets containing mere symbols not "correspondence"; searches without proper safeguards expose officer to personal liability.
|
4 October 1968 |
| September 1968 |
|
|
Foreign exchange control requiring payment into a blocked account does not discharge an English-law obligation to pay sterling in London.
Contract law – supervenient foreign exchange control – lex loci solutionis England – payment into blocked account not discharge; Accord and satisfaction – obligee's consent required; Summary judgment – no triable issue where defence legally unarguable; Jurisdiction – defendant resident/submitted; Equity – resulting trust to prevent double payment.
|
26 September 1968 |
|
Intention is essential in s.58E prosecutions; intoxication and nondisclosure of inconsistent statements can render a conviction unsafe.
Criminal law — s.58E Penal Code (insulting the President) — intention is essential; mens rea must be proved beyond reasonable doubt; voluntary intoxication relevant to mens rea; no immunity for Intelligence Service witnesses; prosecution’s duty to call witnesses fairly and to disclose prior inconsistent statements (Mpofu principle); court may call witnesses if prosecutor fails to do so.
|
18 September 1968 |
|
Convictions quashed for procedural omission and because wounded animals killed by game officers are not "Government trophies."
Criminal procedure – omission to call defence witness – conviction vitiated; Fauna Conservation Ordinance (Cap.241) – s36 "person" excludes requiring a game officer to report to himself; s35 "Government trophy" does not include wounded animals lawfully killed by game officers; implied authority under s28 to kill wounded animals.
|
13 September 1968 |
|
A magistrate is functus officio after announcing a final decision; any subsequent rescission and retrial is ultra vires.
Criminal procedure — Magistrate functus officio — Magistrate's attempted rescission of final decision ultra vires — Convictions and sentences entered after unlawful rescission are nullities; prosecution may retry.
|
13 September 1968 |
|
Undertaking medical treatment imposes a duty of skill and care; gross negligence in dosing causing death amounts to manslaughter.
Criminal law – duty of care when undertaking medical treatment (s.190 Penal Code) – culpable negligence construed by English law (s.4) – Bateman test applied – negligent administration of overdose causing death constitutes manslaughter (s.176).
|
6 September 1968 |
| August 1968 |
|
|
Strict compliance with s.199A admission-of-guilt formalities and fixed-day hearing is required; procedural defects invalidate conviction.
Criminal procedure – admission-of-guilt (s.199A) – strict compliance required – statement of facts must state essential facts and be in prescribed signed form – hearing must occur on fixed day for court to exercise s.199A(5) powers.
|
30 August 1968 |
|
An investigating police officer may prosecute if not to give evidence; minor discrepancies and a date error did not vitiate conviction.
Criminal procedure – Prosecutor selection – Investigating police officer may conduct prosecution if not a witness; Credibility assessments – minor discrepancies immaterial; Particulars – clerical error in dates amendable; Sentence – two years' imprisonment appropriate for substantial theft by public servant.
|
30 August 1968 |
|
Failure to rule on an objection to an identification parade renders the conviction unsafe and may be quashed.
Criminal procedure – Identification parade – Duty of trial magistrate to determine objections to parade conduct; Safety of conviction where objection unaddressed; Court record – Prejudicial observations on arraignment record should not appear.
|
16 August 1968 |
| July 1968 |
|
|
A trial court may not question the accused; reliance on such answers vitiates conviction and sentence.
Criminal procedure – Impropriety of questioning the accused by the trial court – Findings must be based on evidence, not admissions improperly elicited – Conviction quashed.
|
29 July 1968 |
|
The applicant's conviction was quashed due to a defective housebreaking charge and misdirection on burden regarding possession of stolen goods.
Criminal law – Housebreaking – Entry an essential ingredient; defective particulars
Evidence – Theft – Possession of recently stolen property does not shift burden of proof; permissible, not mandatory, inference
Misdirection – Shifting onus to accused invalidates conviction
|
17 July 1968 |
|
Contractual pension rules govern beneficiaries; customary inheritance does not confer rights and a divorce after death is void.
Pension fund – Beneficiaries defined by contract – Rule 6 limits beneficiaries to wife/widow and children; customary inheritance law inapplicable to contractual pension benefits; Local court lacks jurisdiction to grant divorce where one spouse is deceased; Distribution of pension monies to widow and child with investment held for child until majority.
|
15 July 1968 |
|
An appellate court can replace imprisonment with a fine for the applicant's drunken driving where the original sentence was manifestly wrong.
Criminal procedure – Sentencing discretion and appellate interference; Drunken driving – factors in sentencing (degree of intoxication, manner of driving, prior record, medical history); Substitution of imprisonment with fine; Fines must be within means; Mandatory licence suspension confirmed.
|
13 July 1968 |
| June 1968 |
|
|
Self-defence is available against a charge of affray; affray is not a "minor offence" of assault where an extra public-place element is required.
Criminal law – Affray – Self-defence available to person charged with affray – Penal Code s.75; Criminal procedure – Conviction of uncharged offence – "Minor offence" under Cr. Proc. Code s.168 requires cognate offence and lesser penalty; affray not a minor offence of assault where a public-place element is required
|
28 June 1968 |
|
Conviction quashed due to denial of witness, improper medical evidence, procedural errors, and incorrect imposition of burden on accused.
Criminal procedure – accused's right to call a witness present in court; right to re-examine oneself after cross-examination; medical evidence—examining doctor must testify (ZP Form 32 insufficient); procedure for examination and cross-examination where multiple accused; no onus on accused to explain adverse prosecution testimony.
|
18 June 1968 |
|
A confession must be proven voluntary by the prosecution; inadequate caution and police 'pestering' justified excluding the statement.
Evidence – Confession: voluntariness required for admissibility – Burden on prosecution to prove voluntariness – Judge’s discretion to exclude – Adequacy of caution (signature/form) relevant – Custodial authority and repeated questioning may render statement involuntary – Police practice of repeated cautions condemned.
|
17 June 1968 |
|
Unilateral termination without specified notice was unlawful and the daily liquidated damages clause was a penalty and unenforceable.
Contract law – Time not of the essence – unilateral termination requires notice specifying reasonable time; Penalty clause – liquidated damages clause struck down as penalty; Remedies – damages for breach or quantum meruit; Assessment of damages and award of interest and costs.
|
14 June 1968 |
| May 1968 |
|
|
Clothing-based identification at parade invalidates conviction; documentary entries inadmissible without maker’s testimony.
Identification parade – fairness – identification by clothing invalidates parade; Evidence – documentary evidence inadmissible without calling the maker to testify; Insufficient independent evidence to connect accused to crime.
|
9 May 1968 |
|
An out‑of‑court statement by a third party in the accused’s presence is hearsay and inadmissible unless the accused adopts it, requiring acquittal.
Criminal law – Possession of stolen property – Proof of reasonable suspicion under Penal Code s.287; Evidence – Hearsay – Out‑of‑court statements by third persons; Statement made in accused’s presence not evidence of facts stated unless adopted by accused; Prosecutorial misconception about admissibility of such statements.
|
3 May 1968 |
| April 1968 |
|
|
Conviction quashed where charge relied on repealed provision, original-language words were not pleaded or proved, and trial irregularities occurred.
Criminal procedure — Repealed statute — Charge under repealed provision invalid; particulars of insulting national flag — ipsissima verba in original language and translation must be pleaded and proved; intent element essential; unlawful arrest/handcuffing without power; cross-examination by magistrate in prosecutor's absence improper.
|
26 April 1968 |
|
A statutory non-delegable duty made the employer liable for independent contractor's negligent damage to fence and cattle.
Tort — Negligence — Independent contractor — Employer’s liability for non-delegable statutory duty (Electricity Act s41) — Damage to property and livestock — Assessment of damages.
|
24 April 1968 |
|
|
19 April 1968 |
| February 1968 |
|
|
Absent special circumstances, a guilty plea should not attract a heavier sentence than an admission under section 199A; guilty pleas do not waive appeal rights.
Criminal procedure – Sentencing – Comparative treatment of guilty pleas and admissions under s199A – Plea of guilty does not waive right of appeal – Invalidity of police form wording implying waiver of appeal.
|
29 February 1968 |
| January 1968 |
|
|
Court allowed a letter of request for foreign witnesses where their evidence was necessary for justice despite political difficulties.
Evidence — Order VI, rules 25–30: Deputy Registrar may issue commission or letter of request where evidence is "necessary for the purposes of justice"; administrative or political difficulties do not bar letters of request; requirements for foreign evidence: witness unable/unwilling to attend, bona fide and prompt application, and substantial material evidence; prefer letter of request in non‑convention country.
|
8 January 1968 |
|
Atypical presentation of intussusception did not render doctors negligent; treatment and refusal to X-ray were reasonable.
Tort — Medical negligence; standard of care for doctors (Bolam principle); atypical presentation of intussusception; refusal to X-ray not negligent; res ipsa loquitur not invoked; alleged failure of assistant to attend.
|
8 January 1968 |