S v Willem (CC 13 of 2018) [2021] NAHCNLD 21 (12 March 2021)

S v Willem (CC 13 of 2018) [2021] NAHCNLD 21 (12 March 2021)

The application was not properly before the presiding judge because Rule 73(6) mandates that such applications be heard by the managing judge, who in this case was Justice Salionga. The presiding judge therefore declined jurisdiction.

Citation
[2021] NAHCNLD 21
Parties
Applicant: Willem Nakale; Respondent: The State
Court
Northern Local Division
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
12 March 2021
Case Number
CC 13 of 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Application (urgent), Removed From Roll
Outcome
Application removed from the roll for want of jurisdiction.
Legal Topics
Urgent Applications, Jurisdiction, Case Management
Source Language
English
Criminal Procedure Urgent Applications Jurisdiction Case Management

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Willem Nakale

Applicant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Interlocutory Application (urgent), Removed From Roll

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application was properly before the presiding judge under Rule 73(6)
  2. 2 Whether the presiding judge had jurisdiction to hear the urgent interlocutory application

Ratio Decidendi

The application was not properly before the presiding judge because Rule 73(6) mandates that such applications be heard by the managing judge, who in this case was Justice Salionga. The presiding judge therefore declined jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Application removed from the roll for want of jurisdiction.

Orders

  • The application is not properly before the court.
  • The application is removed from the roll.