Moliko and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions (CRI/REV 10 of 2013) [2014] LSHC 75 (29 April 2014)

Moliko and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions (CRI/REV 10 of 2013) [2014] LSHC 75 (29 April 2014)

The application for leave to appeal is refused because the applicants failed to comply with the mandatory requirement to obtain leave before appealing, and there is binding precedent against granting such leave retrospectively.

Citation
[2014] LSHC 75
Parties
Applicant: Bokang Moliko; Applicant: Mothobi Tlaile; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
29 April 2014
Case Number
CRI/REV 10 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Review / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Bail, Leave to Appeal, Procedural Irregularity
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Procedure Bail Leave to Appeal Procedural Irregularity

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bokang Moliko

Applicant

Mothobi Tlaile

Applicant

Director of Public Prosecutions

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Review / Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Magistrate acted irregularly and maliciously in refusing bail
  2. 2 Whether leave to appeal should be granted after procedural omission

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal is refused because the applicants failed to comply with the mandatory requirement to obtain leave before appealing, and there is binding precedent against granting such leave retrospectively.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal is refused.