|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| July 1982 |
|
|
Conviction for rape upheld where reliable identification and absence of motive to falsely implicate outweighed the trial court's corroboration misdirection.
Evidence – Corroboration required for both commission and identity in sexual offences; identification evidence; proviso/special and compelling grounds where no motive to falsely implicate; sentencing – gravity of rape.
|
27 July 1982 |
|
Corroboration required for both commission and identity; conviction may stand if no motive exists for false accusation.
Criminal law — Sexual offences — Corroboration required as to both commission and identity — Failure to warn on identity a misdirection — Conviction may stand where corroboration or special compelling circumstances exclude danger of false accusation — Identification evidence and sentence for rape.
|
26 July 1982 |
|
Where employment is a pure master‑and‑servant contract, wrongful dismissal yields damages, not nullification or reinstatement.
Employment law – master and servant – dismissal – natural justice – parastatal bodies – statutory procedure – wrongful termination gives contractual damages where no statutory protection exists.
|
21 July 1982 |
|
An appellate court may only alter sentences for good cause; corporal punishment should be imposed very sparingly.
Sentence — appellate interference: permissible only for good cause (error in law, fact or principle; manifestly excessive/inadequate; exceptional circumstances). Corporal punishment — inhuman/degrading, to be imposed very sparingly and only for grave brutality or serious outbreak of crime; prevalence of crime insufficient; uncalled for when a long custodial sentence is passed. Credit for guilty plea — must be given and failure to do so renders sentence wrong in principle.
|
16 July 1982 |
|
Appellate interference with sentence requires good cause; corporal punishment is sparingly justified and inappropriate alongside long prison terms.
Sentence — Appellate interference: only for good cause (wrong in law, fact, principle; manifest excess/ inadequacy; exceptional circumstances). Corporal punishment — to be imposed very sparingly; justified only for grave brutality or serious outbreak of crime; inappropriate with long custodial sentences.
|
15 July 1982 |
|
An appellate court may not impose a sentence exceeding the trial court's statutory sentencing power; excessive sentences are invalid.
Criminal law — Appeal — Appellate court’s sentencing power limited by the trial court’s statutory maximum; enhancement beyond trial court’s power is ultra vires and invalid; original lawful sentence reinstated.
|
13 July 1982 |
|
A conviction is unsafe where the trial court glosses evidence, excludes material documents, and unjustifiably prefers contradicted witnesses over the applicant.
Evidence — exclusion of material documentary evidence; credibility assessment — must be contextual and reasons given when preferring contradicted witnesses; conviction unsafe where trial 'glosses' conflicting evidence; criminal mens rea — guilty knowledge not established.
|
12 July 1982 |
|
An appellate court cannot lawfully increase a sentence beyond the trial court's statutory sentencing power; original sentence reimposed.
Criminal law – Appeal – Sentencing – appellate court may not impose a sentence exceeding the trial court's statutory power (ultra vires); section 7(iv) Penal Code; reimposition of lawful original sentence.
|
12 July 1982 |