Search court decisions

…If the Director of Public Prosecutions concurs with the police, a prosecution could be mounted.…

…Prosecutions are mounted based on the material in the hands of the prosecution, no doubt, gathered by the police, during investigations. 12.…

…The key players, in a prosecution, are the complainant, the police and the prosecution.…

…The prosecution involves the complainant, as the originator of the complaint, which is the basis for the prosecution, who providing the key evidence, and witnesses to the prosecution.…

…The key players, in a prosecution, are the complainant, the police and the prosecution.…

…The prosecution involves the complainant, as the originator of the complaint, which is the basis for the prosecution, who provides the key evidence, and witnesses, to the prosecution.…

…Whether the offence of malicious prosecution has been proved? 19. The appellant, vide a plaint, prayed for judgment against the respondents on account of malicious prosecution. 20.…

…the prosecution was out of malice. 21.…

…They submitted that failure by the prosecution to produce crucial evidence was purely a fault on the part of the prosecution. 16.…

…Malicious prosecution is an intentional tort designed to provide redress for losses flowing from an unjustified prosecution.…

…They submitted that failure by the prosecution to produce crucial evidence was purely a fault on the part of the prosecution. 16.…

…Malicious prosecution is an intentional tort designed to provide redress for losses flowing from an unjustified prosecution.…

…The Appellant is the one who set the law in motion that led to the 1st Respondent’s arrest and eventual prosecution and therefore fits the bill of the person who instituted his prosecution.…

…On whether the prosecution was instituted without reasonable or probable cause, I note that the prosecution was terminated by dint of section 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code.…

…The Appellant stated that it had no control over the arrest, investigation, or prosecution. 10.…

…The Appellant attributed any liability for wrongful prosecution to the State actors responsible for investigation and prosecution. 22.…

…The suit, at the primary court, was initiated by the appellant, against the respondents, for compensation, for malicious prosecution, with respect to a criminal prosecution in Makadara CMCCRC No. 4616 of 2014, on a charge…

…, and that it was on that account that the prosecution failed.…

…That the prosecution was terminated in his favour iii. That the prosecution was instituted without a reasonable and probable cause. iv. That the prosecution was actuated by malice. 16.…

…It is settled law that for a plaintiff to prove malicious prosecution he must show that; i. The prosecution was instituted by the defendant, or by someone for whose acts he is responsible; ii.…

…responsible; (b) the prosecution was instituted without reasonable and probable cause; (c) the prosecution was actuated by malice; and (d) the prosecution was terminated in the plaintiff’s favor. 16.…

…In order to prove malicious prosecution, one must demonstrate that; i. That the prosecution was instituted by the appellant. ii. That the prosecution terminated in the respondent’s favour. iii.…

…arrest and malicious prosecution.…

…The appellant pointed out the essential ingredients to prove a case of malicious prosecution; that a prosecution was instituted by the defendant or by someone for whose acts he is responsible, that the prosecution terminated…

…Before the trial court, the respondent had sued the appellants, the Office of the Attorney General, and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions seeking damages for malicious prosecution, unlawful detention, libel…

…by someone for whose acts he is responsible; b) That the prosecution terminated in the plaintiff’s favour; c) That the prosecution was instituted without reasonable and probable cause; and d) That the prosecution was actuated…

…for whose acts he is responsible for, that the prosecution terminated in his favour, that the prosecution was instituted without reasonable and probable cause, and whether the acquittal rendered the prosecution malicious…

…That the prosecution was instituted without reasonable and/or probable cause. iv. That the prosecution was actuated by malice. 25.…

…failure to undertake due diligence or proper investigations; b) Finding that the arrest and prosecution were not malicious or undertaken in bad faith; c) Failing to find that his arbitrary arrest, detention and prosecution…

…Whether malicious prosecution was proved 23. The essential elements of the tort of malicious prosecution are settled.…

…That the respondent had no role in the prosecution and in collecting evidence to sustain the appellant’s prosecution. 22.…

…That the prosecution was instituted without reasonable and/or probable cause. iv). That the prosecution was actuated by malice. 39.…

…In this case the respondent could have brought his action for malicious prosecution until the prosecution ended in his favour.…

…prosecution...…

…In this case the respondent could have brought his action for malicious prosecution until the prosecution ended in his favour.…

…prosecution...…

…cause, and that it was on that account that the prosecution failed.…

…The foundation for the tort of malicious prosecution is malice.…