Waandja v S [2020] NAHCMD 251 (24 June 2020)

Waandja v S [2020] NAHCMD 251 (24 June 2020)

The High Court found that the magistrate correctly exercised her discretion in refusing bail, properly considered the seriousness of the charges, the risk of interference, and the interests of justice, and did not misdirect herself. The appeal court was not satisfied that the magistrate's decision was wrong and therefore dismissed the appeal.

Citation
[2020] NAHCMD 251
Parties
Appellant: Fares Waandja; Respondent: The State
Court
High Court Main Division
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
24 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Bail
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Bail, Appeal, Rape, Indecent Assault, Assault With Intent to Do Grievous Bodily Harm, Domestic Violence
Source Language
English

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fares Waandja

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal of Bail

  1. 1 Whether the magistrate erred in refusing bail to the appellant
  2. 2 Whether the magistrate misapplied section 61 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977
  3. 3 Whether the magistrate wrongly assessed the strength of the State's case and the risk of interference with witnesses or investigations

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court found that the magistrate correctly exercised her discretion in refusing bail, properly considered the seriousness of the charges, the risk of interference, and the interests of justice, and did not misdirect herself. The appeal court was not satisfied that the magistrate's decision was wrong and therefore dismissed the appeal.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The matter is removed from the roll and is considered finalized.