Namibia Case Law

Digashu and Others v GRN and Others; Seiler-Lilles v GRN and Others (HC-MD-CIV-MOT-GEN 427 of 2018; HC-MD-CIV-MOT-REV 447 of 2017)

Digashu and Others v GRN and Others; Seiler-Lilles v GRN and Others (HC-MD-CIV-MOT-GEN 427 of 2018; HC-MD-CIV-MOT-REV 447 of 2017) [2022] NAHCMD 11 (20 January 2022)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

HC-MD-CIV-MOT-GEN 427 of 2018 ; HC-MD-CIV-MOT-REV 447 of 2017

The High Court is bound by the Supreme Court's decision in Chairperson of the Immigration Selection Board v Frank, which holds that same-sex relationships are not recognised in Namibia for purposes of immigration and constitutional protection of family. The Immigration Control Act's definition of 'spouse' does not include same-sex spouses, and the applicants cannot obtain declaratory or constitutional relief in this court. The review relief for Mr Digashu's work permit is granted due to procedural unfairness, but the permanent residence application of Ms Seiler-Lilles fails due to improper ap…

Source excerpt

• Recognition of same-sex marriages
• Discrimination based on sexual orientation
• Permanent residence and work permits
• Interpretation of 'spouse' under immigration control act
• Stare decisis and precedent
• International human rights obligations

Read case analysis

P L v Minister of Home Affairs and Immigration (HC-MD-CIV MOT-GEN 473 of 2019)

P L v Minister of Home Affairs and Immigration (HC-MD-CIV MOT-GEN 473 of 2019) [2021] NAHCMD 481 (13 October 2021)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

HC-MD-CIV MOT-GEN 473 of 2019

A child born outside Namibia through surrogacy to a Namibian parent is eligible for citizenship by descent under Article 4(2) of the Constitution, regardless of biological or genetic link, provided the parent is a Namibian citizen at the time of birth. The Minister's insistence on a DNA test is not supported by the Constitution or the Citizenship Act, is discriminatory, and not in the best interests of the child. International treaties binding on Namibia reinforce the child's right to nationality, non-discrimination, and family unity.

Source excerpt

• Citizenship by descent
• Surrogacy
• Discrimination based on sexual orientation
• Best interests of the child
• Recognition of foreign court orders
• International treaties and obligations

Read case analysis

Clear Enterprises (Pty) Ltd v The Minister of Finance and Others (HC-MD-CIV-MOT-REV 112 of 2017)

Clear Enterprises (Pty) Ltd v The Minister of Finance and Others (HC-MD-CIV-MOT-REV 112 of 2017) [2019] NAHCMD 156 (17 May 2019)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

HC-MD-CIV-MOT-REV 112 of 2017

The High Court held that SACU’s diplomatic immunity barred service of summons, so the court could not authorise service. The application was dismissed with costs.

• Diplomatic immunity
• Service of process
• Headquarters agreement
• Jurisdiction
• Waiver of immunity
• Diplomatic-immunity

Read case analysis

Clear Enterprises (Pty) Ltd v The Minister of Finance andOthers (HC-MD-CIV-MOT-REV 112 of 2017)

Clear Enterprises (Pty) Ltd v The Minister of Finance andOthers (HC-MD-CIV-MOT-REV 112 of 2017) [2019] NAHCMD 151 (17 May 2019)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

HC-MD-CIV-MOT-REV 112 of 2017

The High Court held that SACU enjoyed diplomatic immunity in Namibia, so legal process against it was void and the court could not authorise service of summons.

• Diplomatic immunity
• Service of process
• Headquarters agreement
• Jurisdiction
• Waiver of immunity
• Diplomatic-immunity

Read case analysis

S v Munuma and Others (4) (37 of 2015)

S v Munuma and Others (4) (37 of 2015) [2016] NASC 19 (22 August 2016)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

37 of 2015

For the seventh appellant, Namibian agents exercised coercive power and performed a sovereign act of arrest on Botswana territory, violating international law and ousting jurisdiction; for the remaining appellants, they were surrendered by Botswana authorities on Namibian soil without solicitation or unlawful conduct by Namibian agents, so jurisdiction was proper.

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction
• Extradition
• Abduction
• International comity
• Refugee law
• Immigration law

Read case analysis

S v Koch (1) (SA 13 of 2005)

S v Koch (1) (SA 13 of 2005) [2006] NASC 6 (29 November 2006)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

SA 13 of 2005

The Supreme Court held that the Extradition Act does not exclude a further appeal to the Supreme Court, and such right exists under the Supreme Court Act and High Court Act. The documents tendered by the State were not properly authenticated as the Apostilles were untranslated and there was no proof Germany was a contracting state to the Convention. The evidence adduced did not constitute a prima facie case for committal on any of the charges, as required by Namibian law. Bail proceedings are separate and do not form part of the enquiry record.

Source excerpt

• Right of appeal
• Authentication of foreign documents
• Prima facie evidence
• Double criminality
• Specialty principle

Read case analysis

S v Munuma and Others (1) (CC 3 of 2004)

S v Munuma and Others (1) (CC 3 of 2004) [2005] NAHC 39 (25 October 2005)

Court

High Court

Case number

CC 3 of 2004

The accused were lawfully brought before the court as the evidence showed that the Botswana authorities independently decided to deport them and merely informed the Namibian authorities, who received them at the border. There was no evidence of Namibian involvement or connivance in the deportation process. The clean hands doctrine was not violated, and the court has jurisdiction to try the accused.

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction
• Extradition
• Deportation
• High treason
• Sedition
• Public violence

Read case analysis

S v Mushwena and Others (SA 4 of 2004)

S v Mushwena and Others (SA 4 of 2004) [2004] NASC 2 (21 July 2004)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

SA 4 of 2004

The majority of the Supreme Court found that, except for Charles Kalipa Samboma, the respondents were brought before the Namibian court through a process that bypassed mandatory extradition and deportation procedures, with active involvement or acquiescence of Namibian authorities, resulting in a breach of the rule of law and the respondents' rights. This tainted the proceedings and required the court to decline jurisdiction over the twelve respondents. In the case of Charles Kalipa Samboma, the evidence showed he voluntarily surrendered and consented to return, so the court retained jurisdic…

Source excerpt

• Extradition
• Deportation
• Jurisdiction
• Abduction
• Due process
• Rule of law

Read case analysis

S v Mwinga and Others (2) (SA 1 of 1995)

S v Mwinga and Others (2) (SA 1 of 1995) [1995] NASC 2 (11 October 1995)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

SA 1 of 1995

Namibia’s Supreme Court upheld jurisdiction over a transnational murder charge and convicted four accused of attempted murder arising from border shooting.

• Jurisdiction
• Transnational crime
• Attempted murder
• Murder
• Assault
• Criminal-jurisdiction

Read case analysis

Likanyi v S (2 of 2016)

Likanyi v S (2 of 2016) [2017] NASC 10 (7 August 2017)

Court

Supreme Court

Case number

2 of 2016

The Supreme Court, exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Article 81 of the Constitution, may reverse its own prior decision in exceptional circumstances to prevent manifest injustice. The applicant was in an identical position to another accused whose prosecution was permanently stayed due to unlawful removal from Botswana by Namibian authorities. The failure to extend the same relief to the applicant constituted a grave injustice and unequal treatment. The State failed to prove the High Court had jurisdiction to try the applicant. The prior Supreme Court decision was reversed, the appli…

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction
• Res judicata
• Equality before the law
• Extradition
• Inherent jurisdiction of apex court

Read case analysis