Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
District Judge failed to give reasons for rejecting legal submissions
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court quashes conviction for handling stolen property imposed in the District Court, and remits the matter for a fresh hearing, on the grounds that: 1) the trial judge fell into unconstitutionality by failing to give proper consideration to a number of the submissions made, and failing to give reasons for his rulings; and 2) the manner in which the District Court Judge conducted the hearing breached fundamental principles of fairness and constitutional justice.
Criminal law – judicial review – application to quash conviction for offence of handling stolen property contrary to s. 17 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud) Offences Act, 2001 – whether the District Court Judge failed to give adequate reasons for his refusal to accede to legal submissions made on behalf of the applicant – whether the manner in which the District Court Judge conducted the hearing breached fundamental principles of fairness and constitutional justice – whether the manner in which the District Court Judge conducted the hearing would lead an objective person to believe that the Judge was biased or had come to a view of the merits prior to the case concluding – obligation to give reasons – conviction quashed and matter remitted to District Court.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
