G.Marengo v Republic (SCA 6 of 1991) [1991] SCCA 8 (8 October 1991)
No question of law was raised in the grounds of appeal; the complaint regarding the child witness's evidence was a question of fact, not law, rendering the appeal incompetent.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1991] SCCA 8
- Parties
- Appellant: G. Marengo; Respondent: The Republic
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Seychelles
- Case Number
- SCA 6 of 1991
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Second Appeal; Preliminary Objection
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed as incompetent
- Legal Topics
- Grounds of Appeal, Questions of Law Vs Fact, Child Witness Evidence
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
G. Marengo
Appellant
The Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Second Appeal; Preliminary Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether any grounds of law are raised in the memorandum of appeal on a second appeal
- 2 Whether the rejection of a child witness's evidence raises a question of law
Ratio Decidendi
No question of law was raised in the grounds of appeal; the complaint regarding the child witness's evidence was a question of fact, not law, rendering the appeal incompetent.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed as incompetent
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
1 IN THE SEYCHELLES COURT OF APPEAL G. MARENGO APPELLANT V THE REPUBLIC RESPONDENT Criminal Appeal No. 6 of 1991 Mr. C. Lucas for Appellant Mr. T. Fernando for the respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT Mr. Fernando raised a preliminary objection to the appeal. He submitted that there are no grounds of law raised in the memorandum filed. As this is a second appeal only issues of law can be raised. He referred us to Sec.313 as amended in 1975 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Cap. 45 of the Laws. Mr. Lucas conceded that all but one of his grounds of appeal are concerned with issues of fact. He however submitted that ground 2 concerning the evidence of a child witness could be purely a question of law. We have read ground 2, and find that the complaint is that the Chief Justice had rejected the evidence of a child witness as being unreliable. We can see no question of law involved in that finding. /2. -2- In the circumstances since no question of law has been raised, the appeal is incompetent and is hereby dismissed. ceci-t cc- A. Mustafa President H. Goburdhun Justice of Appeal 4.6 C. de L. d'Arifat Justice of Appeal '15 October, 1991