مبادئ واحكام المحكمة بالانكليزية

رقم نوع تاريخ

High Courts Decisions - Criminal

High Courts Decisions - Constitutional

High Courts Decisions - Civil

2022

Judgments of the Penal Circuit

Cassation No. 1195 of 2021 Issued on 17/12/2022

1- A ruling issued in opposition is considered as void ab initio, rendering any opposition inadmissible, thus necessitating a challenge by way of appeal.

2- Addressing the considerations for a ruling rendered in absentia, in presence, or in default.

3- The contested ruling is deemed as having violated the law due to its rejection of the appeal being filed after the deadline. The case documents do not include a notification to the appellant regarding the ruling passed against him in absentia since he was not present at the scheduled session for the opposition, thereby leaving the avenue for appeal open.

Cassation No. 445 of 2022 - Penal Issued on 18/11/2022

1- The trial court possesses the jurisdiction to acquire an understanding of the facts in the case and to assess the evidence.

2- The court is permitted to derive its conviction regarding the establishment of a crime and the guilt of the accused from any evidence it deems sufficient, without further review, as long as it has a comprehensive understanding of the circumstances of the case.

3- The court is empowered to evaluate the confession of the accused in discretionary crimes, even if subsequently retracted.

4- The accused was proven guilty of creating a website on the TikTok platform to showcase pharmaceutical products without a licence, along with instruments and devices that contravene public morals, through his personal account on social media platforms.

Cassation No. 341 of 2022 - Penal Issued on 11/10/2022

1- The trial court possesses the authority to comprehend the reality in the case, assess its evidence, and discern the truth therein. This authority, however, is contingent upon the court basing its rulings on valid reasons supported by documented facts, sufficient to substantiate its decisions.

2- The ruling shall encompass elements reassuring the reader that the court has diligently examined the presented evidence, as well as the pleas and defences brought before it.

3- The court is required to address any defence that might change the formation of opinion in the case. Failure to do so exposes the ruling to deficiencies in reasoning and constitutes a breach of the right of defence.

4- The contested ruling is considered as having breached the right of defence, as it neglected the appellant’s meritorious defence concerning his non-responsibility for the ship involved in the incident. This was asserted on the grounds of an executive seizure predating the accident and subsequent judicial sale.

Cassation No. 606 of 2022 Issued on 09/08/2022

1- The Court of Appeal’s confirmation of the appealed ruling on the basis its reasons without explicitly stating the reasons but relying on them implicitly, is deemed sufficient. The referral to the reasons serves as a substitute for their explicit enumeration.

2- The trial court possesses the authority to comprehend the reality of the case, assess its evidence, including witness statements, and make a balanced evaluation between them.

3- The court is permitted to rely on the accused''s confession, even if documented in the evidence-gathering report or the public prosecution''s investigation, provided it is satisfied that it was voluntary, deliberate, and made without coercion. This holds true even if the accused later recants the confession in discretionary crimes, and this authority is not subject to further review.

4- The trial court is empowered to rely on statements made by one accused against another accused, even if contained in the police report, as supporting evidence in discretionary crimes. This is permissible as long as these statements align with the existing evidence in the case and are consistent with the truth and reality, even if the accused making such statements later retracts them.

5- The burden of proving that a confession was made under coercion rests with the party asserting such coercion.

6- The contested ruling, establishing that the appellant was in possession of narcotics and psychotropic substances for trafficking, based on the first defendant''s statements that he acquired the seized materials from the appellant, who was found with quantities of crystal narcotics and hashish of various sizes, the forensic laboratory''s report confirming the seized material as hashish, cannabis, and methamphetamine, the appellant''s confession during investigations, and the testimony of the incident officer, is deemed valid.

7- The contested ruling is deemed to have violated the law, as it sentenced the appellant to two years'' imprisonment for the crime of abusing psychotropic substances under the repealed drug law, neglecting to apply the more current and appropriate law, which mandates imprisonment for no less than three months.

Cassation No. 507 of 2022 Issued on 02/08/2022

1- The ruling shall incorporate comprehensive details, satisfying the reader''s inquiry into the court''s scrutiny of presented evidence, as well as the considerations, requests, and pleas brought forth.

2- The court is obligated to address the meritorious defence; failure to do so renders its ruling fatally flawed and indicative of a breach of the right of defence.

3- The plea of inadmissibility of the case on grounds of previous adjudication can be raised at any stage, given its connection to public order, and the court, acting sua sponte, may adjudicate on it without a specific request.

4- The contested ruling shall be reversed due to an error in applying the law, as it neglected to respond to the plea of inadmissibility based on previous adjudication in a ruling of which he submitted a copy, failing to establish that it thoroughly examined the finality, parties, subject matter, and rationale of the prior lawsuit.

Cassations Nos. 785 and 786 of 2022 Issued on 26/07/2022

1- The perpetration of the offence of falsely pretending to hold a position hinges on fraudulent and deceptive acts and external manifestations calculated to engender a belief in the identity of the perpetrator as the legitimate holder of the position he assumes.

2- Mere impersonation of an employee does not rise to the level of interference in the job, as such interference necessitates affirmative actions.

3- The contested ruling is deemed flawed for convicting the appellants of the crime of impersonating a public position solely on the basis of witness statements in the prosecution’s investigations and the complainant''s assertions in the evidence report. Its deficiency lies in the absence of a clear explication of the content of these statements, failing to delineate the extent to which the requisite elements of the crime are manifested.

Cassation No. 518 of 2022 Issued on 19/07/2022

1- The contested ruling is deemed to have erred in the application of the law by erroneously determining that there was no crime of issuing a check in bad faith. This error stems from the court''s lack of insight into the legal basis under which the appellant was brought to trial.

Cassations Nos. 500 and 623 and 631 and 632 of 2022 Issued on 19/07/2022

1- The trial court possesses the authority to assess evidence and presumptions, provided it grounds its ruling on valid reasons sufficient to substantiate it.

2- The court is not obligated to adhere to the arguments and statements presented by the opposing parties and independently respond to them.

3- The conditions for materialisation of the crime involving the coercion of others to surrender money through threats.

4- In the crime of coercing others to surrender money through threats, criminal intent is established by the perpetrator''s intention to acquire the money while being aware that they have no right to it.

5- The appellant''s threat to an institution employee, coercing her to return amounts received as incentives for her work under the threat of termination of her services, is deemed a crime of forcing others to hand over money through threats.

6- The trial court’s assessment of mitigating circumstances and the exercise of clemency lie beyond the oversight of the Supreme Court.

7- The court is empowered to apply a mitigating factor in cases stipulated by the legislator if it deems that the incident and the circumstances of the accused necessitate such an action.

8- The contested ruling is considered defective for violating the law, as the court convicted the respondents under Article 398 of the Penal Code, imposing a fine of five thousand dirhams on each defendant. This penalty contradicts the article''s stipulation, which mandates both imprisonment and a fine. The ruling lacks justification for imposing only a fine.

Cassation No. 556 of 2022 Issued on 05/07/2022

1- The contested ruling is deemed to have erred in the application of the law by imposing a three-month imprisonment sentence on the respondent without providing an explanation for disregarding the precedent established by the appellant. The appellant, having been proven guilty for the second time in the offence of abusing psychotropic substances within three years of the initial crime, is subject to punishment in accordance with the stipulations of Article 41/3 of the Law on Combating Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances, due to his status as a recidivist.

Cassation No. 410 of 2022 Issued on 28/06/2022

1- The ruling shall incorporate details that provide assurance to the person perusing it, indicating the court''s thorough consideration of the case''s elements and examination of meritorious defence that might alter the opinion formation in the case.

2- Penal rulings are grounded in the oral arguments presented before the same judge who issued the ruling and the in-court investigation conducted during the proceedings after the testimonies of witnesses have been heard.

3- The contested ruling is deemed to have violated the right of defence by neglecting to address the appellant''s plea of innocence as presented in his written submission to the Court of Appeal. Moreover, he sought provisional measures to hear the complainant and the defence witnesses whose names were referenced in his submission.

Cassation No. 428 of 2022 Issued on 07/06/2022

1- The trial court is authorised to establish its conviction of the proven crime based on any evidence it finds credible, provided that such evidence is supported with documented facts.

2- The trial court possesses the authority to evaluate the statements of witnesses, consider the circumstances under which they provide their testimony, and form its judgment based thereon, irrespective of challenges or suspicions raised against them.

3- The court, by adopting the witness’s testimony, is deemed to have thoroughly examined all considerations presented by the defence with the aim of refuting them.

4- Definition of insult.

5- The intent in the crime of insult is materialised by the perpetrator''s awareness that the statements constituting insult are degrading to the individual.

6- The trial court’s assessment of the validity of a confession in criminal matters and its probative value.

7- Validity of the contested ruling, convicting the appellant of a crime against reputation, is substantiated by his confession contained in the evidence report. This encompasses his statement that he informed the victim''s father about his daughter''s interaction with a stranger, his admission during the Public Prosecution''s investigations of engaging with the victim, and the complainant''s statements revealing that the accused threatened to disgrace the victim, tarnish her reputation, and harm her family''s reputation following the termination of their relationship.

Cassation No. 345 of 2022 Issued on 07/06/2022

1- Prerequisites for the inadmissibility of case hearing due to previous adjudication.

2- Distinction between the lawsuit involving non-payment of workers'' wages and the lawsuit concerning facility closure without adjusting workers'' situations.

3- The trial court has the authority to evaluate the evidence and presumptions in discretionary crimes.

4- The court is not obligated to independently address opponents'' arguments and statements, provided the response implicitly validates the conclusions in the ruling.

5- Validity of the contested ruling sentencing the appellant for facility closure and cessation of activities without adjusting the situation of sponsored individuals, attributed to the appellant based on assumed liability for the wrongdoing.

Cassation No. 333 of 2022 - Penal Issued on 10/04/2022

1- The option to contest a ruling issued in a case through opposition is available to the accused, but the Public Prosecution is precluded from challenging it through cassation.

2- A ruling issued in absentia on the lapse of the appeal and the appellate opposition filed by the convict, may not be subject to appeal through cassation.

Cassation No. 206 of 2022 Issued on 05/04/2022

1- The respondent stands classified as a recidivist since it is established that he committed a crime involving the abuse of the psychotropic substance amphetamine, received a prior punishment under a final ruling, and subsequently repeated the same offence within a period not exceeding three years. This necessitates imposing his punishment in accordance with Article 41/2 of Law No. 30 of 2021

Cassations Nos. 1208 and 1360 of 2021 Issued on 05/04/2022

1- The trial court possesses the authority to base its ruling on the conclusions drawn from all the elements presented for examination and investigation. It aims to discern the accurate representation of the case''s facts based on a valid conclusion supported by acceptable evidence found in the case documents.

2- The court''s sole authority in assessing the evidence is contingent upon sound judgment and reasoning.

3- The Maliki doctrine concerning premeditated murder focuses on the intentional killing and its resulting outcome, irrespective of whether or not the perpetrator intended to cause the victim''s death.

4- The commission of premeditated murder occurs when the perpetrator deliberately uses force against the victim with a weapon such as a knife, sword, firearm, strangulation, or even through physical strikes like a blow, punch, or with a rod, resulting in the victim''s death.

5- Deliberate infliction of fatal injuries using any means demands retribution according to the principles of the Maliki doctrine.

6- Considering the contested ruling as having erred in the application of Islamic Sharia and the law, by cancelling the appealed ruling that ordered the appellant''s execution as retribution and sentenced him to ten years'' imprisonment for assault leading to death. The ruling also mandated the payment of legal blood money and deportation after completing the sentence, despite the ruling acknowledging evidence of the appellant''s use of a sharp instrument, specifically a cleaver, in the assault on the victim.

Cassation No. 1271 of 2021 Issued on 01/03/2022

1- The trial court is empowered to conclude that the crime has been established and committed by the accused based on any evidence it finds convincing, without further review, provided that it has fully examined and comprehended the case''s circumstances.

2- The authority to assess the adequacy and seriousness of investigations to issue a search and arrest warrant falls under the trial court''s oversight, provided it is convinced of the credibility of the inferences forming the basis of the ruling.

3- The appellant was proven guilty of psychotropic substance abuse according to the chemical laboratory report from the General Department of Criminal Evidence and Criminology, which examined the accused''s urine sample. The analysis confirmed the presence of the psychotropic substance, further supported by the accused''s confession during the trial session.

4- The Court of Cassation shall not entertain any reasons beyond the specified date prescribed for the appeal in cassation.

5- The appellant''s submission to the Criminal Court requesting a sentence mitigation subsequent to the enactment of a more favourable law, results in reducing the sentence initially imposed.

Cassations Nos. 359 and 737 of 2021 - Penal Issued on 17/01/2022

1- The trial court holds the jurisdiction to comprehend the intricacies of the case, evaluate the evidence, including confessions, and deduce an accurate understanding of the situation, based on legal evidence in crimes of aggravated murder.

2- Aggravated murder stands proven upon confession to premeditated murder.

3- Suspicions with respect to the right of God’s servants which is predominant, unlike the right of God, may not deflect punishments, including retribution.

4- Reliance on an individual''s admission is valid even in the event of subsequent retraction.

5- In cases of retribution crimes, the heirs retain their right, which cannot be waived even if the perpetrator withdraws his confession.

6- Classifications of murder as per the Maliki doctrine.

7- The materialisation of the premeditated murder requires the element of intent, irrespective of whether the instrument utilised was lethal or not.

8- Specification of the constituent elements of the crime of murder requiring retribution.

9- Both causing harm using any means and causing death mandate retribution.

10- Criminal intent is perceived as a latent matter.

11- The Maliki doctrine emphasises both the intentional act and its outcomes. Any act leading intentionally to the victim''s death constitutes premeditated murder, subject to punishment and retribution, regardless of whether the perpetrator intended to kill, or the instrument employed in the act.

12- The contested ruling, convicting the appellant of intentionally and aggressively causing the death of the victim and sentencing him to retaliatory death, relies on the presence of legal and factual elements established in the case incident. The incident evolved from a dispute between the accused appellant and his wife, wherein he prepared an incendiary substance for a particular purpose. On entering her room, he discovered her in a relationship with another individual and found them in a state of undress. He subsequently poured the burning substance on them, resulting in her injury and eventual demise, as confirmed by the report issued by the forensic medicine. This ruling is deemed valid and substantiated by documented facts.

13- Avengers of blood possess the right to issue a pardon, replacing retribution with discretionary punishment, in response to the requirements of public rights.

14- Avengers of blood retain the right to waive retribution at any phase of the case or even prior to the completion of execution.

15- The act of pardon by blood avengers, whether with or without compensation, stands as a waiver of retribution, complying with the esteemed Islamic Sharia and the law.

16- Following the presentation of notarised and certified documents signifying pardon and receiving the blood money, the necessity arises to annul the ruling imposing the death penalty as retribution and reinstate a discretionary punishment on the appellant.