|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| April 2001 |
|
|
Whether an amended costs rule applies to judgments entered before its commencement or only prospectively.
Subsidiary legislation – Interpretation of amended scale of costs – Prospective versus retrospective application – Operative date for collection costs is date of judgment – Recovery of collection costs only if expressly awarded as part of the judgment debt.
|
29 April 2001 |
|
An ex parte stay of execution requires full disclosure and particulars of any meritorious defence; bare assertions will be vacated.
Civil procedure – Stay of execution – Order 47/1 – Ex parte applications – Duty of full and frank disclosure by counsel – Meritorious defence must be particularised – Summary judgment – Vacatur of stay.
|
27 April 2001 |
|
Appeal dismissed: joint-enterprise conviction for attempted robbery and three-year sentence affirmed.
Criminal law – Attempted robbery – Joint enterprise/acting in concert (s.21 Penal Code) – Credibility of complainant – Aggravated robbery where committed in company – Sentence proportionality.
|
23 April 2001 |
|
The court confirmed the rape conviction and increased the respondent's sentence from three to seven years for gang rape.
Criminal law – Rape – Gang rape – Sentence – Manifestly inadequate sentence – Confirmation/appeal review – Sentence enhancement – Consistency with precedent (Rep v Ganizani Layelo).
|
11 April 2001 |
|
Conviction for gang rape confirmed; three-year sentence increased to seven years as manifestly inadequate.
Criminal law – Rape – Gang rape – Appropriate sentence for multiple perpetrators and repeated sexual assaults – Confirmation of conviction and enhancement of manifestly inadequate sentence – Precedent consistency in sentencing.
|
11 April 2001 |
|
The respondent's conviction was confirmed and the burglary sentence increased from 30 months to six years' imprisonment.
Criminal law – Burglary – Sentence confirmation and enhancement – Burglary maximum penalty (death or life) – High Court starting point six years – Absence of serious mitigating factors – Concurrent theft sentence.
|
11 April 2001 |
|
Court ordered estate administrators to render accounts and join the Administrator General, refusing immediate revocation despite mismanagement.
Administration of estates – duty of administrator to call in assets, pay creditors, account and protect minors’ interests – failure to account – revocation of letters of administration discretionary – alternative remedies: joinder of Administrator General and applicants, mandatory accounting and scheme for minors – costs against defaulting administrators.
|
6 April 2001 |
|
Whether administrators who fail to account should be compelled to render accounts and protect minor beneficiaries rather than immediately removed.
Administration of estates – duty to render accounts – obligation to provide scheme for minor beneficiaries – revocation of letters of administration as a remedy – joinder of Administrator General and family representative – costs against defaulting administrators
|
5 April 2001 |
|
The applicant’s failure to produce the insurance policy defeated his crop indemnity claim for hail damage.
Insurance law – non-production of policy document bars extrinsic proof of its terms; broker agency (broker as insured's agent); burden to plead and prove special damage; failure to prove indemnity claim.
|
5 April 2001 |