S v Bennett (SS40/2006) [2018] ZAGPJHC 501 (14 August 2018)

S v Bennett (SS40/2006) [2018] ZAGPJHC 501 (14 August 2018)

The court found that Bennett's applications for special entry did not satisfy the statutory requirements under section 317 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The alleged irregularities relied upon by Bennett were all matters appearing on the record and related to rulings made during the proceedings, which are not proper grounds for special entry. Furthermore, Bennett did not allege that a failure of justice had resulted from the alleged irregularities. The State's argument that the applications were not bona fide, were frivolous and amounted to an abuse of process was accepted. The applications were accordingly refused.

Citation
[2018] ZAGPJHC 501
Parties
Respondent: The State; Applicant: Susan Hilary Bennett
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 August 2018
Case Number
SS40/2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Application for Special Entry Under S 317 of the Criminal Procedure Act
Outcome
Applications for special entry refused.
Judges
Spilg
Legal Topics
Special Entry, Irregularity in Trial, Criminal Appeal, Cross Examination, Legal Aid, Judicial Rulings
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Special Entry Irregularity in Trial Criminal Appeal Cross Examination Legal Aid Judicial Rulings

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Respondent

Susan Hilary Bennett

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Application for Special Entry Under S 317 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applications for special entry under section 317 of the Criminal Procedure Act meet the statutory requirements.
  2. 2 Whether the alleged irregularities relied upon by Bennett are proper grounds for special entry.
  3. 3 Whether the applications were made bona fide or amount to an abuse of process.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Bennett's applications for special entry did not satisfy the statutory requirements under section 317 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The alleged irregularities relied upon by Bennett were all matters appearing on the record and related to rulings made during the proceedings, which are not proper grounds for special entry. Furthermore, Bennett did not allege that a failure of justice had resulted from the alleged irregularities. The State's argument that the applications were not bona fide, were frivolous and amounted to an abuse of process was accepted. The applications were accordingly refused.

Court Disposition

Applications for special entry refused.

Orders

  • The two applications for special entry are refused.