Seychelles Case Law

Reference by the Attorney General under Section 342A of the Criminal Procedure Code – Criminal Appeal (SCA CR 02/2025

Reference by the Attorney General under Section 342A of the Criminal Procedure Code – Criminal Appeal (SCA CR 02/2025 [2025] (Arising in CO 11/2024)) [2025] SCCA 15 (18 August 2025)

Court

Court of Appeal

Case number

SCA CR 02/2025 [2025] (Arising in CO 11/2024)

The correct legal standard for a prima facie case in illegal fishing prosecutions is whether the prosecution has adduced credible evidence on each element of the offence, including through circumstantial evidence, such that a reasonable tribunal might convict. The trial judge erred by requiring documentary corroboration as the sole admissible evidence for the vessel's location and by excluding relevant demonstrative evidence. The prosecution's evidence, including eyewitness testimony, photographic evidence, and statutory presumptions, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case. The no cas…

Source excerpt

• Prima facie case
• No case to answer submission
• Illegal fishing
• Judicial impartiality
• Professional conduct of legal practitioners

Read case analysis

The Republic v T Lawen (CR 20 of 2019)

The Republic v T Lawen (CR 20 of 2019) [2023] SCSC 799 (1 December 2023)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

CR 20 of 2019

The Supreme Court of Seychelles dismissed a no case to answer submission in a sexual assault prosecution, finding the complainant’s evidence was not manifestly unreliable.

• Sexual offences
• No case to answer submission
• Credibility of witnesses
• Criminal-law
• Sexual-offences
• No-case-to-answer

Read case analysis

Beau Vallon Properties Ltd and Anor v Verkhoburov (CS 119/2019)

Beau Vallon Properties Ltd and Anor v Verkhoburov (CS 119/2019) [2020] SCSC 573 (30 July 2020)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

CS 119/2019

The Supreme Court of Seychelles held the defendant had a case to answer, finding the plaintiffs had established a prima facie case in a confidentiality dispute.

• Confidentiality agreements
• Breach of contract
• No case to answer submission
• No-case-to-answer
• Employment-law
• Confidentiality-agreements

Read case analysis

R v Labrosse (CO 03/2019)

R v Labrosse (CO 03/2019) [2020] SCSC 561 (24 July 2020)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

CO 03/2019

The Supreme Court of Seychelles dismissed a no-case-to-answer submission in a trafficking prosecution, finding the evidence sufficient to require the accused to enter a defence.

• Trafficking in persons
• No case to answer submission
• Criminal procedure
• No-case-to-answer
• Trafficking-in-persons
• Criminal-procedure

Read case analysis

R v Freminot & Anor (CO 47/2018)

R v Freminot & Anor (CO 47/2018) [2020] SCSC 544 (10 July 2020)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

CO 47/2018

The Supreme Court of Seychelles rejected a no-case-to-answer submission in a drug prosecution, finding enough evidence to require the accused to present a defence.

• Importation of controlled drugs
• Conspiracy
• Trafficking in controlled drugs
• Admissibility of evidence
• No case to answer submission
• No-case-to-answer

Read case analysis

R v De Giorgio (CO 13/2018)

R v De Giorgio (CO 13/2018) [2018] SCSC 8342 (10 December 2018)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

CO 13/2018

There is sufficient evidence on record to establish a prima facie case against the accused on Counts 1, 2, 3, and 5; the prosecution evidence is not so discredited or unreliable as to warrant acquittal at this stage; Count 2 is not duplicitous as it is an alternative count containing a single offence; and charges under both the Penal Code and Anti-Corruption Act can stand, though sentencing must avoid multiple punishments for the same act.

Source excerpt

• Corruption
• Solicitation of property
• Extortion
• Obstruction of justice
• Disclosure of confidential information
• No case to answer submission

Read case analysis

R v Ahmed & Ors (CO 69/2017)

R v Ahmed & Ors (CO 69/2017) [2018] SCSC 8272 (27 September 2018)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

CO 69/2017

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

• Right to fair trial
• Witness coaching
• Piracy
• No case to answer submission
• Identification evidence

Read case analysis

R v Ernesta & Ors (CO 22/2016)

R v Ernesta & Ors (CO 22/2016) [2017] SCSC 964 (15 November 2017)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

CO 22/2016

The Supreme Court of Seychelles held that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against four accused in a controlled-drug trafficking and importation case.

• Trafficking in controlled drugs
• Conspiracy to traffic drugs
• Importation of controlled drugs
• Conspiracy to import drugs
• No case to answer submission
• No-case-to-answer

Read case analysis

R v Stravens (CO CR 28/2013)

R v Stravens (CO CR 28/2013) [2017] SCSC 939 (18 October 2017)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

CO CR 28/2013

The prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case of gross negligence or recklessness required for manslaughter, as the evidence did not show the accused drove in a manner amounting to gross negligence or recklessness. However, there was sufficient evidence of negligence or carelessness to require the accused to answer the charge of causing death by dangerous driving.

Source excerpt

• Manslaughter
• Causing death by dangerous driving
• No case to answer submission
• Demurrer
• Negligence
• Recklessness

Read case analysis

R v Tarani & Ors (CO 25/2016)

R v Tarani & Ors (CO 25/2016) [2017] SCSC 860 (11 May 2017)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

CO 25/2016

There is sufficient evidence on the essential elements of the offences and the prosecution evidence has not been so discredited or rendered unreliable as to warrant acquittal at this stage; a prima facie case exists and the accused must be called to answer the charges.

Source excerpt

• Importation of controlled drugs
• Trafficking in controlled drugs
• No case to answer submission
• Presumption of trafficking
• Right of innocent passage

Read case analysis