Case No.:

AC-REV-65- 1956

Court:

Court of Appeal

Issue No.:

1961

Principles

·  Evidence-Engineer’s certificate inadmissible unless engineer under oath

The district judge properly excluded from evidence an engineer’s certificate made by an engineer dead at time of trial, since he did not appear at trial under oath.

Judgment

(COURT OF APPEAL)*

HARRY DUNN v. EL AMIN MOHAMED EL NUR

AC-REV-65- 1956

Advocate: E. M. Kronfli …….. for the applicant

M. A. Abu Rannat C.J. June 9, 1956:—I have read the evidence heard by the district judge and I cannot say the judge was wrong. He acted on the evidence produced before him.

• Court: M. A. Abu Rannat C.J.

The learned advocate for the applicant contends that the engineer who was supervising the house, and whose evidence would have turned the case against the plaintiffs died and therefore, the applicant should be believed in everything he said.

The contention of the learned advocate amounts to this:

“that there was important evidence, but that evidence was never heard by the district judge.”

Unless the applicant who was the defendant in this case proves his case by preponderance of evidence, the court cannot pass a decree in his favour. A certificate from an engineers if not produced by the engineer himself, is inadmissible as evidence.

In my view there is no hope of success for this application and I have, therefore, summarily dismissed it