Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Seychelles decisions
Decisions matching the current search
R v HL (CR 44 of 2023) [2024] SCSC 199 (28 November 2024)
The Supreme Court of Seychelles dismissed a sexual assault charge after finding the prosecution had not made out a prima facie case, chiefly on identification evidence.
R v HL (CR 44 of 2023) [2024] SCSC 200 (28 November 2024)
The Supreme Court of Seychelles acquitted the accused on a no-case-to-answer ruling, finding insufficient identification evidence to require a defence.
R v AH (CN 69 of 2019) [2023] SCSC 680 (11 September 2023)
The Supreme Court of Seychelles convicted the accused of sexual assault against his 5-year-old daughter and acquitted him of exhibiting indecent material.
Republic v SWM (CO 101 of 2021) [2023] SCSC 128 (17 February 2023)
The Supreme Court of Seychelles convicted the accused of sexual assault, finding the prosecution proved penile penetration, identification, and the complainant’s age beyond reasonable doubt.
R v Wehliye & Ors (CO 28/2019) [2020] SCSC 671 (22 December 2020)
The prosecution established a prima facie case against the accused on all counts based on the evidence adduced, including circumstantial and identification evidence. The alleged defects in the charge and lack of direct identification do not warrant upholding the submission of no case to answer at this stage. The accused are called upon to make their defence.
Source excerpt
R v KNF (CR 17/2017) [2020] SCSC 563 (27 July 2020)
The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was the perpetrator of the offences due to unreliable identification evidence, absence of an identification parade, and the inherent weaknesses and contradictions in the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses. Dock identification without prior reliable out-of-court identification was insufficient to sustain a conviction.
Source excerpt
R v Ahmed & Ors (CO 69/2017) [2018] SCSC 8272 (27 September 2018)
The court found that the prosecution witnesses were coached by the Deputy Attorney General, affecting the fairness and credibility of the prosecution's case. The evidence was so manifestly unreliable that no reasonable tribunal could safely convict the accused. There was reasonable doubt as to the correctness of the identification evidence, and thus no case to answer for all accused.
Source excerpt
R v Jumaye (CO 43/2017) [2018] SCSC 8247 (29 August 2018)
The court found the complainant's identification of the accused as credible and reliable, noting her prior acquaintance with the accused and her detailed account of the incident. The court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed robbery with violence as charged.
Source excerpt
R v Fanchette (CO 70/2017) [2018] SCSC 8044 (22 January 2018)
The court held that the seriousness of the offence and public interest, combined with the risk of absconding and interference with witnesses, justified continued remand of the accused. No change of circumstances was shown to warrant bail.
Source excerpt
R v Philoe & Anor (CO 64/2015) [2017] SCSC 904 (19 July 2017)
The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that both accused, acting with common intention, robbed the victim using violence, and the circumstantial and identification evidence was reliable and sufficient for conviction.
Source excerpt
Explore more
