Mbiu v Rex (Criminal Appeal No. 406 of 1951)
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 of Appeal held that Rule 3(1) of the African-grown Coffee Rules 1949 was ultra vires section 4 of the Crop Production and Livestock Ordinance. Section 4 empowered the Governor to make rules applicable to named areas but did not authorize rules imposing restrictions on particular racial groups. Rule 3(1) prohibited Africans from growing coffee outside scheduled areas—an unnamed area comprising the whole Colony minus Schedule A—and imposed a racial restriction not applicable to Europeans or Asians. The rule exceeded statutory powers and was invalid.
Outcome
Appellant's conviction quashed and sentence set aside; rule declared ultra vires
Facts
Koinange Mbiu, an African, was charged before the First Class Magistrate's Court at Kiambu with growing approximately 10,000 coffee seedlings on his land at Kiambaa in Kiambu District. The coffee was not grown on a plantation approved by the Director of Agriculture and was not situated in an area set out in Schedule A of the African-grown Coffee Rules 1949. The Agricultural Officer swore and signed a complaint containing full particulars of the offence but no formal charge was drawn up. The appellant pleaded "I admit the offence" and was convicted and sentenced to a fine of Sh. 100 with confiscation of the seedlings. The prosecution alleged breach of Rule 3(1) of the African-grown Coffee Rules made under the Crop Production and Livestock Ordinance. The appellant appealed on the sole ground that Rule 3(1) exceeded the rule-making powers conferred by the Ordinance.
Issues
- Whether Rule 3(1) of the African-grown Coffee Rules 1949 exceeded the rule-making powers conferred on the Governor in Council under section 4 of the Crop Production and Livestock Ordinance.
- Whether the irregularity in failing to draw up and sign a formal charge occasioned a failure of justice.
- Whether an appellant who pleaded guilty could appeal on the ground that the rule under which he was convicted was ultra vires.
- Whether Rule 3(1) was repugnant to Article 34 of the Royal Instructions 1934 which prohibited laws subjecting non-Europeans to disabilities not also imposed on Europeans.
Orders
- Appeal allowed.
- Conviction and sentence set aside.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (10)
- African-grown Coffee Rules 1949 (G.N. 1172/49) Rule 3(1)
- Crop Production and Livestock Ordinance Cap. 205 s.4
- Crop Production and Livestock Ordinance Cap. 205 s.5
- Interpretation (Definition of African and Native) Ordinance No. 55 of 1934 s.2
- Coffee Industry Ordinance Cap. 201 s.13
- Coffee (Marketing) Ordinance Cap. 202
- Criminal Procedure Code s.89(3)
- Criminal Procedure Code s.381
- Criminal Procedure Code s.348(1)
- Royal Instructions 1934 Article 34
Cases cited (4)
- Gray v R (2 L.R.E.A. 40)
- R v Timotheo Waiganjo Wa Muni & Another (6 C.A.E.A. 79)
- Commissioner for Local Government, Lands and Settlement v Kaderbhai (12 K.L.R. 12)
- Fielding v Rex (26 Cr. A.R. 211)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.