Reuben Schofoluwe V. The King (1951)

LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West African Court of Appeal

Deposition of witness wrongly admitted in evidence—Requirements of section 34 of the Evidence Ordinance (Cap. 63) not fulfilled-.-Witness not a public officer and evidence on oath to establish foundation for admission of deposition essential—Submission by Crown that under section 225 (1) of Evidence Ordinance evidence wrongly admitted could not reasonably be held to have affected the decision not upheld.

Facts

Section 34 of the Evidence Ordinance provides for the admission of depositions in certain circumstances. Except in the case of a public officer, evidence on oath is required to provide a foundation for admission of such deposition. The witness was not a public officer. Evidence on oath was not adduced and the Crown conceded that deposition was wrongly admitted, but argued that the decision of trial Court should not be reversed, because deposition wrongfully admitted could not reasonably be held to have affected- the result.

Held

Evidence on oath by some witness who can be cross-examined is essential to establish foundation for admission of deposition. The deposition was wrongly admitted. The deposition was that of a witness who gave material evidence and also produced books of account which, in the absence of the witness, were also wrongly admitted. The decision of the trial Judge was affected by this evidence wrongly admitted, and the conviction could not be upheld. Conviction quashed.

Appeal allowed.