S v Heslop (216/05) [2006] ZASCA 20; [2006] SCA 22 (RSA) (20 March 2006)

S v Heslop (216/05) [2006] ZASCA 20; [2006] SCA 22 (RSA) (20 March 2006)

The appeal was struck off the roll due to procedural irregularities, specifically the absence of a power of attorney from the appellant and the inability to trace his whereabouts. The court found that the filing of heads of argument by the appellant's legal representative without proper authority was improper. Furthermore, the court expressed grave concern over the delay of more than nine and a half years in transmitting the appeal record to the Supreme Court of Appeal. The registrar was directed to seek a full explanation from the Johannesburg High Court regarding the delay and from the Johannesburg Justice Centre regarding the filing of heads of argument without a power of attorney and...

Citation
[2006] ZASCA 20
Parties
Appellant: Reuben Heslop; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 March 2006
Case Number
216/05
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Hearing
Outcome
Appeal struck off the roll due to procedural irregularities and inability to trace the appellant.
Judges
Scott, Cloete, Van Heerden
Legal Topics
Culpable Homicide, Appeal Delay, Power of Attorney, Heads of Argument
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Culpable Homicide Appeal Delay Power of Attorney Heads of Argument

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Reuben Heslop

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What caused the delay of over nine years in transmitting the appeal record to the Supreme Court of Appeal.
  2. 2 Whether it was proper for heads of argument to be filed on behalf of the appellant without a power of attorney.
  3. 3 What steps have been taken to trace the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was struck off the roll due to procedural irregularities, specifically the absence of a power of attorney from the appellant and the inability to trace his whereabouts. The court found that the filing of heads of argument by the appellant's legal representative without proper authority was improper. Furthermore, the court expressed grave concern over the delay of more than nine and a half years in transmitting the appeal record to the Supreme Court of Appeal. The registrar was directed to seek a full explanation from the Johannesburg High Court regarding the delay and from the Johannesburg Justice Centre regarding the filing of heads of argument without a power of attorney and...

Court Disposition

Appeal struck off the roll due to procedural irregularities and inability to trace the appellant.

Orders

  • The registrar of the Supreme Court of Appeal is to address a letter to the registrar of the Johannesburg High Court requesting a full and detailed explanation for the delay in transmitting the appeal record and identification of those responsible.
  • The registrar is to address a letter to the Johannesburg Justice Centre for the attention of Adv Miller requesting an explanation for the filing of heads of argument without a power of attorney and detailing steps taken to trace the appellant.