S v Rittman (2) (CA 63 of 2009) [2010] NAHC 150 (12 October 2010)

S v Rittman (2) (CA 63 of 2009) [2010] NAHC 150 (12 October 2010)

The appellant acted in self defence and/or defence of property and clients; the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused did not genuinely believe he was acting in self defence or exceeded its bounds.

Citation
[2010] NAHC 150
Parties
Appellant: Rudolf Rittman; Respondent: The State
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
12 October 2010
Case Number
CA 63 of 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed; conviction set aside
Legal Topics
Self Defence, Assault With Intent to Do Grievous Bodily Harm, Onus of Proof
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Self Defence Assault With Intent to Do Grievous Bodily Harm Onus of Proof

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rudolf Rittman

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant acted in self defence or exceeded its boundaries
  2. 2 Whether the threat to appellant’s property or interest was imminent

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant acted in self defence and/or defence of property and clients; the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused did not genuinely believe he was acting in self defence or exceeded its bounds.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; conviction set aside

Orders

  • conviction is set aside