Bester v S (Leave to Appeal) (83/2023) [2025] ZAFSHC 131 (29 April 2025)

Bester v S (Leave to Appeal) (83/2023) [2025] ZAFSHC 131 (29 April 2025)

The court held that the ruling compelling the applicant to respond to the State's section 212B notice was not appealable, as it was not definitive of the parties' rights and did not dispose of any substantial relief in the criminal proceedings. The ruling had no practical effect, as the deadline for response had passed and any admissions would be subject to inquiry by the trial court under section 212B(5). The applicant's constitutional rights were not infringed, as he was not compelled to make admissions or waive his right to remain silent. The court found no compelling reason to grant leave to appeal, emphasizing that interlocutory rulings in uncompleted criminal proceedings should not...

Citation
[2025] ZAFSHC 131
Parties
Applicant: Thabo Bester; Respondent: The State
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 April 2025
Case Number
83/2023
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following a Pre Trial Ruling in Criminal Proceedings
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Judges
JP Daffue
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Criminal Pre Trial Procedure, Section 212b Criminal Procedure Act, Fair Trial Rights, Audi Alteram Partem, Mootness
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Criminal Pre Trial Procedure Section 212b Criminal Procedure Act Fair Trial Rights Audi Alteram Partem Mootness

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 6 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thabo Bester

Applicant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following a Pre Trial Ruling in Criminal Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is the pre-trial ruling compelling the applicant to respond to a section 212B notice appealable before the criminal trial commences.
  2. 2 Does the ruling infringe the applicant's constitutional rights under sections 34 and 35 of the Constitution, including the right to remain silent and to a fair trial.
  3. 3 Would granting leave to appeal serve any practical effect or result, or is the matter moot.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the ruling compelling the applicant to respond to the State's section 212B notice was not appealable, as it was not definitive of the parties' rights and did not dispose of any substantial relief in the criminal proceedings. The ruling had no practical effect, as the deadline for response had passed and any admissions would be subject to inquiry by the trial court under section 212B(5). The applicant's constitutional rights were not infringed, as he was not compelled to make admissions or waive his right to remain silent. The court found no compelling reason to grant leave to appeal, emphasizing that interlocutory rulings in uncompleted criminal proceedings should not...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.