S v Ndweni and Others (376/94, 390/94, 639/98) [1999] ZASCA 51; [1999] 4 All SA 377 (A) (31 August 1999)

S v Ndweni and Others (376/94, 390/94, 639/98) [1999] ZASCA 51; [1999] 4 All SA 377 (A) (31 August 1999)

The court found that the applicants had made out a satisfactory case for the relief sought, as the new evidence regarding APLA's claimed responsibility, Dolo's affidavit, and identification evidence from witnesses was materially relevant and only came to light after the trial. The requirements for reopening the case and leading further evidence were satisfied, particularly given the unusual circumstances and the dictates of fairness. The court emphasized that the final outcome would depend on the trial court's assessment of all the evidence, and that success in the application did not guarantee acquittal. The convictions and sentences were set aside, and the matter was remitted to the...

Citation
[1999] ZASCA 51
Parties
Applicant: Boy Titi Ndweni; Applicant: Sipiwe James Bholo; Applicant: Sipho Samuel Gavin; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
31 August 1999
Case Number
376/94, 390/94, 639/98
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Adduce Further Evidence After Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Application granted; convictions and sentences set aside; matter remitted to trial court for further evidence and de novo decision.
Judges
Smalberger, Grosskopf, Mpati
Legal Topics
Leave to Adduce Further Evidence, Reopening of Trial, Identification Evidence, Amnesty Applications, Confession Evidence
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Leave to Adduce Further Evidence Reopening of Trial Identification Evidence Amnesty Applications Confession Evidence

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Boy Titi Ndweni

Applicant

Sipiwe James Bholo

Applicant

Sipho Samuel Gavin

Applicant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Adduce Further Evidence After Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants should be granted leave to adduce further evidence after conviction and sentence.
  2. 2 Whether the requirements for reopening a criminal trial and leading further evidence are satisfied.
  3. 3 Whether the new evidence regarding APLA's claimed responsibility and identification of attackers is materially relevant and reasonably possibly true.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had made out a satisfactory case for the relief sought, as the new evidence regarding APLA's claimed responsibility, Dolo's affidavit, and identification evidence from witnesses was materially relevant and only came to light after the trial. The requirements for reopening the case and leading further evidence were satisfied, particularly given the unusual circumstances and the dictates of fairness. The court emphasized that the final outcome would depend on the trial court's assessment of all the evidence, and that success in the application did not guarantee acquittal. The convictions and sentences were set aside, and the matter was remitted to the...

Court Disposition

Application granted; convictions and sentences set aside; matter remitted to trial court for further evidence and de novo decision.

Orders

  • The convictions and sentences of the applicants on all counts are set aside.
  • The matter is remitted to the trial court to allow the applicants to call or recall specified witnesses for examination or further cross-examination, and to hear their evidence to the extent relevant and admissible.