S v Paulo and Another (4) (CC 10 of 2009) [2011] NAHC 176 (21 June 2011)

S v Paulo and Another (4) (CC 10 of 2009) [2011] NAHC 176 (21 June 2011)

The application for leave to appeal was filed out of time as computed under the Interpretation of Laws Proclamation, 1920, and no application for condonation was filed; therefore, there is no valid application before the court and the application must be dismissed.

Citation
[2011] NAHC 176
Parties
Appellant: Daniel Joao Paulo; Appellant: Josue Manuel Antonio; Respondent: The State
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
21 June 2011
Case Number
CC 10 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Computation of Time, Condonation
Source Language
English
Criminal Procedure Leave to Appeal Computation of Time Condonation

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Joao Paulo

Appellant

Josue Manuel Antonio

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for leave to appeal was filed within the statutory time limit under section 316 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1977
  2. 2 Whether computation of the 14-day period should follow the Interpretation of Laws Proclamation, 1920 or the Rules of Court
  3. 3 Whether the absence of an application for condonation invalidates the application for leave to appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal was filed out of time as computed under the Interpretation of Laws Proclamation, 1920, and no application for condonation was filed; therefore, there is no valid application before the court and the application must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.