Contract Law – claim for damages – where the respondent had a contract with the appellant for storage of goods in the appellant’s warehouse – appellant failed to release some of the goods when called upon to do so - claim by the appellant that the respondent could not have recovered the damages for loss of the goods from the appellants warehouse because the respondent was allegedly not the owner of the goods – whether the respondent had a clear cause of action to justify the remedy given by the High Court – whether the appeal had merit.

..

..

Criminal law - murder - date murder of a woman in a hotel room - conviction based on circumstantial evidence - test to be applied to circumstantial evidence - whether the inculpatory facts were compatible with the innocence of the accused and could be explained only on the basis of his guilt - Penal Code section 203, 204

.

Criminal Practice and Procedure- second appeal-appeal against conviction and sentence –where the appellants had been charged with two counts of robbery with violence and sentenced to death-appeal on the ground inter-alia that the court erred in law in failing to appreciate that a miscarriage of justice occurred as the trial magistrate failed to comply with  the provisions of section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code which was prejudicial to the appellants- rule of natural justice -rights of an accused person to be informed of the right to have the previous witnesses re-summoned and reheard - duty to protect the right placed on the trial magistrate which  burden is placed in mandatory terms -violation of thatt right-whether the appeal was merited-whether a retrial could be ordered - section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code, Penal Code section 296 (2)

...

Criminal practice and procedure-second appeal-appeal against conviction and sentence-where the appellants were convicted on the offence of robbery with violence and sentenced to death- evidence on record showing 2^nd and 4^th appellants were improperly convicted- 1^st and 3^rd appellants properly convicted-where the language used by the prosecution witnesses was not recorded- duty on the part of an accused person to indicate to the court, that he is not able to understand the language of the proceedings though the duty does not lessen the duty of the court of being satisfied that the accused is able to follow the proceedings- principles to guide the court on whether to order a retrial -where it was in the interest of justice to order a retrial -whether a retrial for the 1^st and 3^rd appellants  could be ordered - section 296(2) of the Penal Code ,Section 77 (1) (b) and (f) of the Constitution

 Constitutional law-rights of accused-violation of rights-whether the appellants rights had been violated-where the proceedings were conducted in a language not understood by the appellants-effect of- duty of the courts to enforce the provisions of the Constitution- Section 77 (1) (b) and (f) of the Constitution

.