.

Criminal Law-stealing by servant-appeal- appeal against sentence- the appellant convicted on her own plea of guilty to the offence of stealing by servant and was sentenced to 4 years imprisonment- where the appellant was a 18 years old at the time of sentencing, a first offender and was remorseful-the appellant had served almost two years of her sentence-whether the sentence was harsh and excessive under the circumstances- Section 281 of the Penal Code

[Ruling] Company Law-winding up application by interested party to have their vehicles released to them-on the ground that the interested parties were the legitimate and lawful proprietors of the said vehicles -where the Receivers/Managers had exceeded the authority conferred upon them by an order given by the court by taking possession of vehicles which were not set out in the order-basic principle of Company Law that an incorporated company has a separate legal existence from its shareholders or directors-whether the orders sought could be granted-Section 3A of the Civil Procedure Act; Section 228 and 348 of the Companies Act and Rule 9 (R) of the Companies (High Court) Rules

Criminal practice and procedure-robbery-the appellant was convicted of the offence and sentenced to 1 year probation sentence-appeal against conviction-grounds of appeal that there were inconsistencies in the prosecution evidence to warrant a conviction-whether the evidence adduced was sufficient to convict-whether the appeal had merit-Penal Code section 296 (1); Oaths and Statutory Declarations Act section 19 (1)

.

.

Civil Practice & Procedure-damages-special damages-where a party to a suit simply claims special damages as a result of professional advice as opposed to such damages being specifically proven-the plaintiff claiming special damages being costs of repairs without proving that the repairs were done and costs inccurred-need for special damages to be specifically proven.

Civil Procedure & Practice-record of appeal-whether it is mandatory for both the judgment and degree to be in the record.

Criminal practice and procedure-robbery-the appellants were convicted of the offence and sentenced to 7 years imprisonment-appeal against conviction and sentence-grounds of appeal that identification evidence by a single witness was not credible and that the identification parades were botched-whether the identification parade provided needed corroborative evidence-whether the evidence adduced was sufficient to secure a conviction-whether the appeal had merit-Penal Code section 296 (1) (2)