|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| June 2003 |
|
|
|
27 June 2003 |
|
Appeal dismissed: trial court's findings of publishing false statements, undue influence, and treating were supported and not displaced on appeal.
Electoral law – Election petition – Publication of false statements (Reg. 56(2)) – Undue influence (Reg. 54(1)(c)(ii)) – Treating (Reg. 53) – Appellate review limited to questions of law – Deference to trial judge on credibility and demeanor – Findings of fact not disturbed absent perversity or lack of evidence.
|
25 June 2003 |
|
Supreme Court upheld trial judge’s factual findings of false statements, undue influence and treating and dismissed the appeal.
Electoral law — Election petition — Regulation 56(2) (publishing false statements); Regulation 54(1)(c)(ii) (undue influence); Regulation 53 (treating) — Appellate review of factual findings — Standard for disturbing trial judge’s findings of fact — Article 72(2) appeals limited to questions of law.
|
25 June 2003 |
|
A tribunal may restore struck‑out proceedings, but an intervenor must establish a clear proprietary interest against the registered owner to be joined.
Lands Tribunal — power to restore struck‑out proceedings; joinder/intervention — must demonstrate clear interest against the party sought to be joined; claim against another party does not justify joinder; Limitation Act/ adverse possession considerations.
|
11 June 2003 |
|
Procedural defects do not render dismissal wrongful where employee’s culpability for a dismissible offence is undisputed.
Employment law – wrongful dismissal – procedural fairness – rules of natural justice not decisive where employee’s culpability for dismissible offence is undisputed – misconduct may justify summary dismissal despite procedural defects.
|
5 June 2003 |
|
|
5 June 2003 |
|
|
5 June 2003 |
|
Rule 78 corrects clerical slips only; it cannot be used to review judgments or introduce new grounds not on appeal.
Civil procedure – Supreme Court Rules – Rule 78 (slip rule) – limited to clerical errors and accidental slips or omissions – cannot be used for substantive review, reinterpretation of judgment, or to raise new points not included in the appeal.
|
5 June 2003 |
|
Court held that invoking a notice clause cannot mask dismissal for incompetence; employee must be heard and may recover damages.
Employment law – termination by notice versus dismissal for conduct/performance – section 26A Employment Act requires an opportunity to be heard – Industrial and Labour Relations Act s85(5) permits courts to look behind notice to administer substantial justice – damages for mental distress and withheld contractual benefits – interest on awards.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
Termination by notice is wrongful where employer’s true reason is incompetence and statutory right to be heard was denied.
Employment law – Termination by notice – Where real reason is conduct or performance employer must afford opportunity to be heard (Employment Act s26A) – Industrial Relations Court may probe behind notice to administer substantial justice (ILRA s85(5)) – Natural justice breach – Holiday allowance payable as condition of service – Damages for mental distress recoverable.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
Assessment of damages is abusive where parties have already settled the claim out of court.
Civil procedure – assessment of damages – effect of out-of-court settlement – abuse of court process – dismissal of assessment application.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
An assessment application is improper and may be an abuse of process where the respondent has already paid a full and final settlement.
Settlement out of court – Effect on assessment of damages – Application for assessment rendered unnecessary after full and final settlement – Abuse of court process where assessment pursued despite settlement – District Registrar's dismissal upheld.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
A failed defence of provocation is an extenuating circumstance warranting reduction of a death sentence to imprisonment.
Criminal law – Murder – Sentencing – Provocation – Whether a failed defence of provocation constitutes an extenuating circumstance – Appellate substitution of death sentence with term of imprisonment.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
A failed defence of provocation can be an extenuating circumstance warranting reduction of a death sentence to long imprisonment.
Criminal law – Murder – Provocation – Failed defence of provocation as potential extenuating circumstance at sentencing – Sentencing discretion – Substitution of death sentence with lengthy imprisonment.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
Summary dismissal for dishonesty upheld where employee diverted bonuses to avoid overdraft; procedural fairness affirmed.
Employment law – Summary dismissal for dishonesty – Diversion of salary/bonuses to avoid overdraft – Disciplinary procedure and natural justice – Industrial Relations Court powers (s85, s108) – Substantial justice.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
Appellant's summary dismissal for diverting bonuses upheld as dishonest and procedurally fair; appeal dismissed with costs.
Employment law – Dishonesty and summary dismissal – Diversion of salary/bonuses to avoid overdraft; Natural justice – notice of charge, disciplinary hearing and right to appeal; Industrial and Labour Relations Act – Section 108 (discrimination) and Section 85 (court’s power to do substantial justice); Standard of proof – balance of probabilities.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
Failed provocation and intoxication were held to be extenuating circumstances, reducing the death sentence to 20 years' imprisonment.
Criminal law – Murder – Sentencing – Death penalty – Extenuating circumstances – Failed provocation and intoxication as grounds for reducing a death sentence – Appeal against sentence – Substitution of term of imprisonment.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
Failed provocation and intoxication reduced the appellant's death sentence to 20 years' imprisonment.
Criminal law – Murder – Sentence – Death penalty – Provocation and voluntary intoxication as extenuating circumstances – Failed provocation may warrant reduction of death sentence.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
|
4 June 2003 |
|
Enhancing a sentence without giving the appellant the statutory opportunity to be heard is a misdirection and nullity.
Criminal procedure – Sentencing confirmation – High Court review and enhancement of subordinate court sentence – Requirement to afford accused opportunity to be heard under section 333(2) Criminal Procedure Code – Enhancement in absence a misdirection and nullity – Remittal for re-sentencing.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
An appeal challenging factual findings on retrenchment calculation was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction under section 97.
Industrial and Labour Relations Act s.97 – appeals limited to points of law or mixed law and fact; calculation of retrenchment packages – salary at date of purported dismissal; salary increases between dismissal and judgment recoverable as interest; fiction of reinstatement not applied to vary factual award.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction under s.97 ILRA; retrenchment calculated from date of dismissal, post-dismissal increases recoverable by interest.
Labour law – Industrial Relations Court findings of fact – appellate jurisdiction under s.97 ILRA – calculation date for retrenchment packages – salary at date of purported dismissal; interest for post-dismissal salary increases; entitlement to repatriation and accrued leave.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
Appeal allowed: evidence of gross negligence supported dismissal under employer’s disciplinary code; High Court misdirected, award set aside.
Employment law — disciplinary dismissal — gross negligence and wilful disobedience — sufficiency of evidence to prove loss of employer’s property — disciplinary code categories and appropriate penalty — appellate review of trial judge’s misdirection.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
Employee's dismissal for gross negligence in loss of employer's goods was lawful where disciplinary procedure complied and evidence supported guilt.
Employment law – wrongful dismissal – disciplinary procedure – gross negligence of duty – offences warranting instant dismissal – assessment of damages for wrongful dismissal.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
Contractual conditions governed repatriation (no cash), uniform deductions, and housing entitlement; appeal dismissed with costs.
Employment law – contractual conditions of service – repatriation clause obliges employer to bear transport cost, not to pay cash; uniform recoveries – claimant must prove entitlement under conditions; housing allowance – entitlement depends on proof of involuntary removal; costs – appellate deference to trial court discretion.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
An allocation of customary land without consulting affected persons is void; bona fide improvements are compensable.
Land law — customary tenure — Section 3(4) Lands Act — mandatory consultation of chief, local authority and persons whose interests might be affected — allocation void if consultation absent; equitable estoppel inapplicable; entitlement to compensation for bona fide improvements — valuation by Government Evaluation Department.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
Allocation of customary land without statutorily required consultation is void, but bona fide improvements are compensable.
Lands Act s3(4) – customary land – mandatory consultation with chief, local authority and persons whose interests may be affected – failure to consult renders allocation void; estoppel cannot override statutory mandate; bona fide improvements compensable; customary tenure and reallocation on non-use.
|
4 June 2003 |
|
Whether the applicant may recover an overpayment caused by computing pension on post-retirement salary instead of at the normal pension date.
Pension scheme law – Interpretation of scheme rules – "Final Pensionable Salary" – Deferred retirement – Mistake in computation versus waiver – Recovery of monies erroneously paid.
|
3 June 2003 |