The High Court struck out a defective joint defence that was neither verified nor dated, holding the omission fatal rather than a curable technicality.
The High Court dismissed an appeal against a 30-year armed robbery conviction, holding that the magistrate had no proper reason to recuse and that the accused chose to remain silent.
The judge's disqualification without reasons, the order to expunge exhibits, the failure to deliver a ruling on no case to answer, the premature summing up to assessors, and the order for a de novo trial were all irregular and contrary to law. The Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to revise such interlocutory orders under section 4(3) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act. The proper order is to quash all proceedings after 13.9.2006 and direct the trial to continue before the same judge from that date.
The allegations against the trial magistrate were unfounded, unsupported by evidence, and appeared to be a tactic to delay proceedings. There was no apparent error, illegality, or irregularity in the magistrate's refusal to disqualify herself. The High Court correctly dismissed the revision application as section 372 of the Criminal Procedure Act was not applicable in the absence of such error.
The High Court dismissed an application to set aside an ex parte judgment, finding the applicants were properly served and had not exercised due diligence.