Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Namibia decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Ndukireepo v S (HC-MD-CRI-APP-CAL 80 of 2021) [2022] NAHCMD 607 (7 November 2022)
The High Court refused condonation for a late application for leave to appeal in a murder case, finding no reasonable explanation and no prospects of success.
S v Amupolo (HC-NLD-CRI-APP-SNA 3 of 2022) [2022] NAHCNLD 70 (8 July 2022)
The High Court set aside a section 174 discharge in a criminal appeal, holding that the State had made out a prima facie case on crimen injuria and assault.
Haungeya v S (129 of 2016) [2017] NAHCMD 172 (23 June 2017)
The High Court dismissed a murder appeal, upholding conviction and 17-year sentence after finding the self-defence claim unsupported and no sentencing misdirection.
S v Eiseb (4) (Appeal Judgment) (CA 28 of 2009) [2010] NAHC 194 (22 November 2010)
The High Court of Namibia dismissed an application for leave to appeal, finding no reasonable prospects of success on appeal against conviction and sentence.
S v Rittman (2) (CA 63 of 2009) [2010] NAHC 150 (12 October 2010)
A criminal appeal over assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm succeeded after the court found the appellant acted in self-defence or defence of property.
S v Haoeb (CA 64 of 2004) [2007] NAHC 44 (19 June 2007)
The court found that the trial court misdirected itself in evaluating the evidence and the issue of private defence. On the objective facts, the appellant could have reasonably apprehended grievous bodily harm, and the State failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the use of the knife was unreasonable. The murder conviction could not stand, but the conviction for assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm was supported by the evidence.
Source excerpt
S v Haileka (CA 92 of 2006) [2006] NAHC 62 (30 November 2006)
The magistrate erred in rejecting the appellant's version of self-defence, as it was reasonably possibly true and supported by available evidence. The conviction for culpable homicide could not stand due to lack of sufficient medical evidence to establish causation and the possibility of a novus actus interveniens. The State failed to discharge its onus, and the appellant was entitled to acquittal.
Source excerpt
S v Jonkers (1) (SA 15 of 2003) [2006] NASC 4 (21 April 2006)
The Supreme Court of Namibia set aside a murder conviction, holding that the State failed to disprove self-defence beyond reasonable doubt on the evidence.
S v Matheus (1) (SA 11 of 2001) [2002] NASC 7 (2 April 2002)
The accused did not act in justifiable self-defence; he exceeded the bounds of self-defence and was negligent in believing he was entitled to act as he did. The State proved the accused was guilty of culpable homicide, not murder, as there was no direct intent or dolus eventualis.
Source excerpt
S v Kutamudi (CC 7 of 2003) [2002] NAHC 8 (31 January 2002)
The court found beyond reasonable doubt that the accused's confession was made freely and voluntarily, that he was properly informed of his rights, and that any irregularity in the preliminary proceedings did not result in unfairness. The accused's version was rejected as false and implausible. The evidence, including medical and forensic evidence, established that the accused intentionally killed the three victims and was guilty of murder on all counts.
Source excerpt
Explore more
