Seychelles Case Law

Jean-Charles & Anor v The Republic (SCA CR 10 of 2022; SCA CR 13 of 2022)

Jean-Charles & Anor v The Republic (SCA CR 10 of 2022; SCA CR 13 of 2022) [2023] SCCA 6 (26 April 2023)

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

SCA CR 10 of 2022 ; SCA CR 13 of 2022

The convictions were supported by direct and circumstantial evidence, including accomplice testimony, corroborated by phone records and medical evidence. The trial judge's summing up was balanced and in accordance with the law. The charges were sufficiently particularized, and the appellants' rights to a fair trial and to silence were not violated. The jury was properly directed on all material issues, and the verdicts were not unsafe or unreasonable.

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Counselling or procuring to commit murder
• Accomplice evidence
• Right to silence
• Summing up by judge
• Circumstantial evidence

Read case analysis

Harry Dupres v The Republic (SCA 17 of 2019)

Harry Dupres v The Republic (SCA 17 of 2019) [2020] SCCA 26 (18 December 2020)

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

SCA 17 of 2019

The Court of Appeal of Seychelles allowed an appeal against a drug-conspiracy conviction, quashed the sentence, and acquitted the appellant.

• Conspiracy
• Importation of drugs
• Accomplice evidence
• Burden of proof
• Jurisdiction
• Criminal-law

Read case analysis

Monthy v R (SCA 4 of 2018)

Monthy v R (SCA 4 of 2018) [2018] SCCA 32 (13 December 2018)

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

SCA 4 of 2018

The Court of Appeal upheld Alex Monthy’s conviction for conspiracy to commit arson, reduced his prison term to 6 years, and maintained the fine and compensation orders.

• Conspiracy
• Arson
• Evidence assessment
• Sentencing
• Variance between charge and evidence
• Accomplice evidence

Read case analysis

Sifflore v R (SCA 15 of 2011)

Sifflore v R (SCA 15 of 2011) [2015] SCCA 41 (17 December 2015)

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

SCA 15 of 2011

The Court of Appeal allowed a criminal appeal against a conspiracy-to-traffick conviction, finding the evidence of accomplice witnesses unsafe and insufficient.

• Conspiracy
• Drug trafficking
• Evidentiary standards
• Accomplice evidence
• Criminal-conspiracy
• Drug-trafficking

Read case analysis

R v David and Ano. (CO 49/2013)

R v David and Ano. (CO 49/2013) [2015] SCSC 223 (3 July 2015)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

CO 49/2013

The Supreme Court of Seychelles convicted both accused of robbery with violence and conspiracy, accepting accomplice evidence with supporting corroboration.

• Robbery with violence
• Conspiracy to commit a felony
• Common intention
• Accomplice evidence
• Corroboration
• Robbery-with-violence

Read case analysis

Dugasse & Ors v R (SCA 25, 26 and 30 of 2010)

Dugasse & Ors v R (SCA 25, 26 and 30 of 2010) [2013] SCCA 6 (3 May 2013)

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

SCA 25, 26 and 30 of 2010

The evidence, including the testimony of the accomplice Ms Isaacs, corroborated by the conduct and admissions of the appellants and surrounding circumstances, established beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants aided and abetted and conspired to traffic in a controlled drug. The substitution of the illicit substance with a non-illegal substance during a controlled delivery did not negate the offence, as the appellants acted under the belief that the substance was a controlled drug. The trial judge was not required to give a corroboration warning, and the identification of the accused was…

Source excerpt

• Drug trafficking
• Aiding and abetting
• Conspiracy
• Controlled delivery
• Accomplice evidence

Read case analysis

Republic v Lebon and Another (22 of 2008)

Republic v Lebon and Another (22 of 2008) [2009] SCSC 113 (8 March 2009)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

22 of 2008

The court found that Barnsley Lebon had actual and exclusive possession and control of the cannabis in the red plastic bag, and the prosecution proved all elements of trafficking beyond reasonable doubt. For Paul Japhet, the evidence was insufficient and the manner of the second search created doubt, which was resolved in his favor, leading to his acquittal.

Source excerpt

• Trafficking in controlled drugs
• Possession of controlled drugs
• Burden of proof
• Presumption of possession
• Accomplice evidence

Read case analysis