Namibia Case Law

Hatuikulipi v S (CC 6 of 2021)

Hatuikulipi v S (CC 6 of 2021) [2022] NALCMD 693 (27 December 2022)

Court

Labour Court Main Division

Case number

CC 6 of 2021

The applicant's new facts, though new, do not establish a new perspective that impacts on the old facts or change the basis on which bail was initially refused. The State has made out a strong prima facie case, the offences are serious, and the interests of justice do not merit release on bail under these circumstances.

Source excerpt

• Bail
• New facts in bail applications
• Racketeering
• Money laundering
• Fraud
• Theft

Read case analysis

Hatuikulipi v S (CC 6 of 2021)

Hatuikulipi v S (CC 6 of 2021) [2022] NAHCMD 693 (27 December 2022)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

CC 6 of 2021

The applicant's new facts, though new, do not change the basis on which bail was initially refused. The State has established a strong prima facie case, and the seriousness of the offences, public interest, and administration of justice justify continued detention. The new facts do not establish a new perspective impacting the old facts; bail is refused.

Source excerpt

• Bail
• New facts in bail applications
• Racketeering
• Money laundering
• Fraud
• Theft

Read case analysis

S v Tiboth (CR 130 of 2022)

S v Tiboth (CR 130 of 2022) [2022] NAHCMD 645 (28 November 2022)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

CR 130 of 2022

The High Court of Namibia set aside a theft conviction and sentence because the matter was wrongly dealt with under section 112(1)(a) of the CPA.

• Theft
• Criminal procedure
• Review of conviction
• Plea procedure
• Criminal-procedure
• Review-of-conviction

Read case analysis

S v Bumes (CC 1 of 2020)

S v Bumes (CC 1 of 2020) [2022] NAHCNLD 123 (18 November 2022)

Court

Northern Local Division

Case number

CC 1 of 2020

Bail on new facts was refused where the applicants’ changed circumstances were not truly new or were insufficient to displace the earlier refusal.

• Bail
• New facts in bail applications
• Wildlife crime
• Possession of firearms
• Possession of controlled wildlife products
• Theft

Read case analysis

S v Jerobeam (CC 6 of 2020)

S v Jerobeam (CC 6 of 2020) [2022] NAHCMD 617 (14 November 2022)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

CC 6 of 2020

The seriousness, premeditation, and brutality of the crimes, the vulnerability of the victims, and the absence of remorse outweigh the mitigating factors. Custodial sentences are inevitable, and concurrent sentences are ordered to ensure the total effective sentence is proportionate to the blameworthiness of the accused.

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Robbery
• Conspiracy
• Theft
• Defeating or obstructing the course of justice
• Sentencing

Read case analysis

S v Inotila; S v Martha (CR 62 of 2022)

S v Inotila; S v Martha (CR 62 of 2022) [2022] NAHCNLD 120 (3 November 2022)

Court

Northern Local Division

Case number

CR 62 of 2022

The High Court confirmed theft convictions but corrected vague suspended sentences by removing unclear community-service wording and aligning the records with the true sentences.

• Theft
• Sentencing
• Suspended sentence
• Community service
• Review procedure
• Criminal-law

Read case analysis

S v Steenkamp and Others (113 of 2022)

S v Steenkamp and Others (113 of 2022) [2022] NAHCMD 575 (21 October 2022)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

113 of 2022

The conviction and sentence were proper, but the sentence formulation was vague and required amendment for clarity and legal certainty.

Source excerpt

• Theft
• Sentencing
• Review procedure

Read case analysis

S v Imbili (CR 111 of 2022)

S v Imbili (CR 111 of 2022) [2022] NAHCMD 560 (17 October 2022)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

CR 111 of 2022

The alternative term of imprisonment was disproportionate to the fine imposed, constituting a misdirection by the trial court, warranting adjustment of the sentence.

Source excerpt

• Theft
• Sentencing
• Proportionality of sentence
• Automatic review

Read case analysis

S v Rachael; S v Rumbidzai; S v Ndimanguluke (CR 51 of 2022)

S v Rachael; S v Rumbidzai; S v Ndimanguluke (CR 51 of 2022) [2022] NAHCNLD 100 (29 September 2022)

Court

Northern Local Division

Case number

CR 51 of 2022

Automatic review of three criminal matters confirmed the convictions but amended defective suspended sentences to make the conditions clear and lawful.

• Suspended sentences
• Formulation of suspension conditions
• Immigration offences
• Theft
• Community service
• Criminal-review

Read case analysis

S v Kashikukumwa (CR 48 of 2022)

S v Kashikukumwa (CR 48 of 2022) [2022] NAHCNLD 97 (27 September 2022)

Court

Northern Local Division

Case number

CR 48 of 2022

On review, the High Court confirmed a theft conviction but amended the sentence after finding the suspension condition and compensation order were incompetent.

• Theft
• Suspended sentence
• Compensation
• Sentencing procedure
• Suspended-sentence
• Sentencing-procedure

Read case analysis