Results.
6 judgments found.
|
|
|
| August 2003 |
|
|
Assessment of damages for partial finger amputation: proven medical costs, K28,800 loss of earning capacity, K50,000 non-pecuniary award.
-
Personal injury — assessment of damages — medical expenses must be proved — loss of earning capacity assessed by multiplicand and multiplier — non-pecuniary damages guided by comparative awards
|
31 August 2003 |
|
High Court: contempt was criminal and involved dishonesty/moral turpitude; seats vacated by operation of law; each party bears own costs.
-
Constitutional law — Jurisdiction of High Court to review parliamentary decisions (s108); Contempt of court — civil v criminal; Criminal contempt as crime involving dishonesty and moral turpitude; Operation of sections 51 and 63 — vacancy of parliamentary seats; Limitations on political rights (s44)
|
26 August 2003 |
|
Conviction based solely on another accused’s unadopted confession is invalid; prosecution must show adoption or independent evidence.
-
Evidence — Confessions — Admissibility of one accused’s confession against co-accused — section 176(2) Criminal Procedure and Evidence Code — requirement of adoption or independent evidence — no case to answer where prosecution relies solely on another’s unadopted confession
|
12 August 2003 |
|
Conviction based on visual identification without Turnbull directions and a flawed identification parade is unsafe.
-
Criminal law — Robbery — Visual identification evidence — Identification parade obligations and proper conduct — Duty to call parade officer — R v Turnbull directions — Appellate review of factual findings where identity is central
|
3 August 2003 |
|
Conviction based mainly on visual identification without proper parade or Turnbull directions is unsafe and set aside.
-
Criminal law — Robbery — Visual identification — Identification parade — Duty to prove parade properly conducted — R v Turnbull directions required — Appellate review of magistrate's findings
|
3 August 2003 |
|
Prosecutors may charge s311 and the substantive offence together; courts should defer to prosecutorial discretion and manage overlap at sentencing.
-
Criminal law — breaking into a building and committing a felony (s311) — charging the substantive offence (theft) in same indictment — prosecutor's discretion — de minimis principle — court's limited power to interfere — sentencing concurrency
|
3 August 2003 |