Results.
6 judgments found.
|
|
|
| December 2011 |
|
|
A previous conviction must pre-date the offence to attract the mandatory ten-year sentence for second trafficking offences.
-
Criminal procedure — proof of previous convictions — fingerprints and Criminal Record Office certificates; prosecutor duty to obtain/produce records; sentencing — previous conviction must pre-date the offence; Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act s.44 mandatory ten-year minimum for second/subsequent trafficking offences
|
29 December 2011 |
|
Appellate court held Local Court appeals are reheard de novo and upheld a bona fide purchaser's title to plot 12/27.
-
Appeals from
-
Local Courts — rehearing de novo; Res judicata (cause of action estoppel) and waiver; Equity — priority (qui prior est tempore); Bona fide purchaser for value without notice — requisites and effect; Appellate review of factual findings
|
28 December 2011 |
|
Failure to constitute a Subordinate Court as a Juvenile Court renders proceedings void and any reformatory order quashed.
-
Juveniles Act — constitution of Juvenile Court — mandatory compliance with ss.63 & 65 — failure fatal — proceedings a nullity — reformatory order quashed — retrial ordered; Criminal Procedure Code s.338 revisionary powers
|
28 December 2011 |
|
Appellate court upheld three-year sentence for theft by agent; value of stolen property not determinative; deterrence relevant.
-
Criminal law — Sentencing — Theft by agent — Value of property not determinative — Trial court discretion — Appellate interference only if wrong in principle or manifestly excessive — Prevalence and deterrence as sentencing considerations — Medical evidence required for health mitigation
|
28 December 2011 |
|
Persistent unjustified non-attendance constitutes abuse of process, permitting dismissal despite lack of shown prejudice.
-
Civil procedure — Review (Order 39) — Special leave where review exceeds 14 days — Dismissal for want of prosecution — Persistent non-attendance by counsel — Abuse of process even without demonstrable prejudice
|
18 December 2011 |
|
An agent must be authorised and be the causa causans of a sale to earn commission; unauthorised co‑agent cannot sue.
-
Contract — Commission — Agent must be authorised by principal and be the causa causans of the sale to earn commission; unauthorised co‑agent lacks locus standi; assessment of commission when purchase price disputed
|
8 December 2011 |