Wakilii

Johnston v Rex (Criminal Appeal No. 165 of 1951)

East African Court of Appeal · [1951] EACA 278 · 1951 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from High Court decision on case stated following Magistrate's acquittal
Decision
Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction to challenge High Court decision on case stated

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The Court held that no appeal lies from a decision of the High Court on questions of law arising on a case stated, as section 337 of the Criminal Procedure Code makes such orders final and conclusive. However, an appeal may lie on jurisdictional grounds if there is a serious contention that the subordinate court or High Court lacked jurisdiction. The Court found no jurisdictional defect in this case and dismissed the appeal.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction to challenge High Court decision on case stated

Facts

Johnston was charged before the Resident Magistrate, Dar es Salaam, with possession of property feloniously obtained outside the territory contrary to section 313 of the Tanganyika Penal Code. At the close of the prosecution's case, the Magistrate held that the evidence did not disclose an offence and acquitted Johnston. The Attorney General appealed to the High Court by way of case stated under section 333 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the acquittal, and remitted the case to the Resident Magistrate with a direction to hear and determine the charge according to law. Johnston then appealed to the Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa against the High Court's order.

Issues

  1. Whether the Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa has jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from a decision of the High Court on a case stated under section 333 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
  2. Whether an appeal lies on a question of jurisdiction where it is contended that the subordinate court had no jurisdiction to state a case or the High Court had no jurisdiction to hear and determine the case stated.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.

Rules and key headnotes

Criminal Procedure — Appeals — Case Stated — Finality of High Court Decision
No appeal lies from a decision of the High Court on questions of law arising on a case stated under section 333 of the Criminal Procedure Code, as section 337 provides that all such orders shall be final and conclusive on all parties.
Criminal Procedure — Appeals — Jurisdictional Challenges to Case Stated
An appeal lies from a decision of the High Court on a case stated if there is raised a serious contention that the subordinate court had no jurisdiction to state a case or that the High Court had no jurisdiction to hear and determine the case stated, as questions of jurisdiction are always in issue notwithstanding statutory provisions making decisions final and conclusive.
Criminal Procedure — Case Stated — No Case to Answer — Subordinate Court Jurisdiction
An acquittal upon a ruling of no case to answer is a determination within the meaning of section 333 of the Criminal Procedure Code and confers a right of appeal by way of case stated. Section 341, which is merely procedural, does not restrict this right of appeal.
Statutory Interpretation — Finality Clauses — Jurisdictional Review
Statutory provisions that decisions shall be final and conclusive are not sufficient to bar an appeal or review grounded upon an objection to jurisdiction, as the question of jurisdiction is always in issue.

Legislation cited (11)

  • Tanganyika Penal Code s.313
  • Tanganyika Criminal Procedure Code s.333
  • Tanganyika Criminal Procedure Code s.337
  • Tanganyika Criminal Procedure Code s.325
  • Tanganyika Criminal Procedure Code s.334
  • Tanganyika Criminal Procedure Code s.312
  • Tanganyika Criminal Procedure Code s.341(b)
  • Tanganyika Criminal Procedure Code s.205
  • Kenya Criminal Procedure Code s.346
  • Old Age Pensions Act 1908 s.7(2)
  • Asylum Officers Superannuation Act 1909 s.15

Cases cited (8)

  • Simpson v District Council of Nakuru (1938) 5 EACA 54
  • Simpson v District Council of Nakuru (1938) 6 EACA 83
  • Rex v Ibrahim H Lakhani (1943) 10 EACA 107
  • Attorney General v Godwin Mwakalinga (1947) 13 EACA 158
  • Betts v Stevens (1910) 26 TLR 7
  • Murphy v The King [1911] AC 401
  • Rex v Minister of Health ex parte Committee of Visitors of Glamorgan County Mental Hospital [1938] 4 All ER 32
  • Attorney General v SM Bashir and SF Hassan (1931) 23 KLR 78

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Johnston v Rex (Criminal Appeal No. 165 of 1951) [1951] EACA 278 (1 January 1951)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.