Meyer v Groenewald and Another (A412/2007) [2008] ZAFSHC 20 (21 April 2008)

Meyer v Groenewald and Another (A412/2007) [2008] ZAFSHC 20 (21 April 2008)

The court held that it is established law that review of interlocutory decisions in pending criminal proceedings should only be entertained in exceptional circumstances where grave injustice would result. The applicant failed to demonstrate any irregularity in the refusal to discharge him on charges 2 and 27. In respect of charge 2, the admission of a copy of the dishonoured cheque was justified, as the cheque was the subject of the charge and the applicant was aware it would be required; the best evidence rule did not preclude its admission under these circumstances. Regarding charge 27, the magistrate's amendment of the charge sheet was within his statutory powers and did not prejudice...

Citation
[2008] ZAFSHC 20
Parties
Applicant: Esias Engelbertus Meyer; Respondent: Streeklanddros A. Groenewald; Respondent: Die Direkteur Openbare Vervolging
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 April 2008
Case Number
A412/2007
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Review of Refusal of Discharge on Certain Charges During Pending Criminal Trial
Outcome
The application for review is dismissed.
Judges
Cillié, R, Moloi, WND R
Legal Topics
Review of Interlocutory Orders, Admissibility of Secondary Evidence, Discharge Application, Irregularity in Criminal Proceedings
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Review of Interlocutory Orders Admissibility of Secondary Evidence Discharge Application Irregularity in Criminal Proceedings

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Esias Engelbertus Meyer

Applicant

Streeklanddros A. Groenewald

Respondent

Die Direkteur Openbare Vervolging

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Review of Refusal of Discharge on Certain Charges During Pending Criminal Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal to discharge the applicant on charges 2 and 27 during the pending criminal trial constitutes a reviewable irregularity.
  2. 2 Whether the admission of a copy of a dishonoured cheque as evidence, rather than the original, amounts to an irregularity justifying review.
  3. 3 Whether the magistrate's amendment of the charge sheet in respect of charge 27 was irregular and prejudicial to the applicant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that it is established law that review of interlocutory decisions in pending criminal proceedings should only be entertained in exceptional circumstances where grave injustice would result. The applicant failed to demonstrate any irregularity in the refusal to discharge him on charges 2 and 27. In respect of charge 2, the admission of a copy of the dishonoured cheque was justified, as the cheque was the subject of the charge and the applicant was aware it would be required; the best evidence rule did not preclude its admission under these circumstances. Regarding charge 27, the magistrate's amendment of the charge sheet was within his statutory powers and did not prejudice...

Court Disposition

The application for review is dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for review is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs is made against the second respondent.