R v Savy (CO29/2017) [2018] SCSC 8139 (4 April 2018)

R v Savy (CO29/2017) [2018] SCSC 8139 (4 April 2018)

The statement under caution taken from the accused was inadmissible because he was not informed of his constitutional rights under Article 18(2) while under arrest, and Judge’s Rule 2(1) was insufficient.

Citation
[2018] SCSC 8139
Parties
Prosecution: The Republic; Accused: Marcus Savy
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
4 April 2018
Case Number
CO29/2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
Outcome
Statement under caution declared inadmissible.
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Constitutional Rights of Accused, Right to Counsel
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Admissibility of Evidence Constitutional Rights of Accused Right to Counsel

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Republic

Prosecution

Marcus Savy

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused was properly informed of his constitutional rights under Article 18(2) before giving a statement under caution
  2. 2 Whether Judge’s Rule 2(1) is sufficient to protect the constitutional rights of an accused under arrest

Ratio Decidendi

The statement under caution taken from the accused was inadmissible because he was not informed of his constitutional rights under Article 18(2) while under arrest, and Judge’s Rule 2(1) was insufficient.

Court Disposition

Statement under caution declared inadmissible.

Orders

  • Statement under caution taken from accused on 22nd June 2017 by ASP Leon will not be admitted in evidence.