Wakilii

Rex v Wanyee (Criminal Appeal No. 15 of 146)

East African Court of Appeal · [1946] EACA 57 · 1946 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Criminal appeal from conviction for keeping a brothel
Decision
Appellant's conviction quashed and sentence set aside

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

A landlord who lets premises to prostitutes knowing they will use the rooms for prostitution, but who does not reside on the premises or take any part in their management and is only concerned with receiving rent, is not 'keeping' a brothel within the meaning of section 149 of the Penal Code. To sustain a conviction, it must be proved that the accused took part in the care, government and management of the premises.

Outcome

Appellant's conviction quashed and sentence set aside

Facts

The appellant was the owner of a building which he let out in rooms to prostitutes, knowing they were prostitutes and would use the rooms for prostitution. He did not reside on the premises nor take any part in its management, being only concerned with receiving rent. He was convicted by the Magistrate of keeping a brothel contrary to section 149 of the Penal Code and sentenced to pay a fine of £100 with six months' imprisonment with hard labour in default, and to execute a bond for £200 with one surety to be of good behaviour for one year. The Magistrate found that by setting aside the premises for this class of tenants and making no attempt to obtain a better class of tenant despite warnings, the appellant was 'keeping' the premises for prostitution.

Issues

  1. Whether a landlord who lets premises to prostitutes knowing they will use the rooms for prostitution, but who does not reside on or manage the premises, is 'keeping' a brothel within the meaning of section 149 of the Penal Code.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Conviction and sentence set aside.
  • Fine, if paid, to be refunded.

Rules and key headnotes

Criminal Law — Keeping a Brothel — Meaning of 'Keeps'
To sustain a conviction for keeping a brothel under section 149 of the Penal Code, it must be proved that the accused took part in the care, government and management of the premises in question.
Criminal Law — Keeping a Brothel — Landlord's Liability
A landlord cannot be convicted of keeping a brothel merely because, having notice of the nature of the occupation, he does not give the tenant notice to quit, nor even if at the time he let the house he knew it was to be used for purposes of prostitution and received additional rent by reason of such occupation.
Statutory Interpretation — Plain Meaning — 'Keep' Distinguished from 'Suffer'
The word 'keep' in section 149 of the Penal Code cannot be read as meaning 'suffering' or mere passive permission; it requires active participation in the management of the premises.

Legislation cited (1)

  • Penal Code s.149

Cases cited (2)

  • R v Barrett (1875) 9 Cox CC 255
  • R v Stannard (1863) 9 LT 428

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Rex v Wanyee (Criminal Appeal No. 15 of 146) [1946] EACA 57 (1 January 1946)
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.