GHANA LAW FINDER

                         

Self help guide to the Law

  Easy to use   Case and Subject matter index  and more tonykaddy@yahoo.co.uk
                

HOME           7  WEST AFRICA COURT OF APPEAL

 
                                           

                                                                 LAGOS, 1ST MAY, 1941.

                                               KINGDON, PETRIDES AND GHAHAM PAUL, C.JJ

                                                                 COMPTROLLER OF CUSTOMS                    Respondent

                                                                                          v

                                                                    MICHAEL NTIERO EFFIOM                           Appellant.

                        

LAGOS, 1ST MAY, 1941.

COR. KINGDON, PETRIDES AND GRA:a:AM COMPTROLLER OF CUSTOMS

v.


 

 

I)AUL, C.JJ. Appeal Court,

Respondent 1st May, . 1941.


 

 

37


 

 


 

                                                                                     MICHAEL NTIERO EFFIOM           Appellant.

Convictions under Customs Ordinance, Cap. 130 of (a) smuggling and (b) and (c). being in possession of prohibited imports­Lack of eV,idence in (a)-(b) and (c) should have been struck out vide Stated Case immediately hereinbefore reported.

Held : Appeal allowed, convictions quashed.

'l'here is no need to set out the facts. C. W. Reece for Crown.

E. E. E. Anwan for Appellant.

The following joint judgment was delivered:-

KINGDON, C.J., NIGERIA, PETRIDES, C.J., GOLD COAST, GRAHAM PAUL, C.J., SIERRA LEONE.

In this case the appellant was charged before Jeffreys, Acting Assistant Judge of the High Court at Buea, with the following offences: -

" I.-STATEMENT OF OFFENCE.

" Smuggling contra. sec. 221 (1) (a) Cap. ISO.

" PARTICULARS OF O~·FENCE.

" That Michael Ntiero Effiom on the 24th day of June, 1940, at "Bimbia Man-of-War Bay, in the Cameroons Province did smuggle " twelve tierces of tobacco value £959 7s 9d gross weight 4,553 lb."

" 2.-STATEMENT O~' OFFENCE.

"Being in possession of prohibited import contra~ sec. 223 (1) (a) " Cap. 130.

" PARTICULARS OF OFFENCE.

"He at the same time and place did smuggle one automatic • "pistoL

" 3.-STATEMENT OF OFFENCE.

" Being in possession of prohibited import contra. sec. 223 (1) (a) " Cap. 130.

" PARTICULARS OF OFFENCE.

'. He at the same time and place did smuggle twenty rounds of pistol " ammunition."


 

 

Appeal from coRviction by High Court.


 

 

~ I "

 

 

 

"

 

 

 

 

....

 

 

 

 

~~

 

 

 

 

"

'.

 

 

 

 

 

\

\

 

 

 

"

 

"J Iii

 

 

,. , ~

 

 

III

 

h.

 

 

-; I I~

 

 

I!'i II,

 

 

.,of

 

i~

 

 

~ 11'·

 

 

 

 

I'

 

 

..,

 

 

 

 

- I'

 


 

 

38

Comptroller of Customs

v.

Michael Ntiero Effiom.

Kingdon, Petrides and

Graham Paul C.J].


 

 

Comptroller of Customs v. Michael N. ElJiom.

The trial Judge convicted him of all three offences and pa88ed sentence in the folluwing terms:-

" ON THE FIRST CHARGE.

"I order the forfeiture of the canoe and of thc tobacco. I impolW " a penalty under section 231 of the Customs Ordinance of three times "the value of the goods namely a fine of £2,700 or in default twelve "months I.H.L.

" ON TIlE SECOND CHARGE.

" I order the forfeiture of the pistol and imppse a sentence of three " months I.H.L.

" ON THE THIRD CIIARGB.

"I order the forfeiture of the ammunition and imvose a sentencl' "of one month I.H.L.

" All sentences are to run consooutively."

On appeal the learned Counsel for the Crown has felt unable to support any of the convictions and we agree that they can none of them stand, for the following reasons:-

On the first charge, Smuggling, there was no evidence at all of any actual smuggling or of any attempt to smuggle.

As to the second alleged offence, the charge and particulars should have been struck out as bad for reasons already explained in the decision of the Court upon the case stated in this matter.

And the same applies to the third offence.

The appeal is allowed all the convictions are quashed, the sentences passed, the penal.ty imposed, and the orders of fodeiture made in the Court below are annulled and it is directed that in respect of each of the charges a judgment and verdict of acquittal be entered.

 

 

 
 

Legal Library Services        Copyright - 2003 All Rights Reserved.