S v Pillay and Others (409/2002) [2003] ZASCA 129; [2004] 1 All SA 61 (SCA); [2007] 1 All SA 11 (SCA); 2004 (2) BCLR 158 (SCA); 2004 (2) SACR 419 (SCA) (28 November 2003)

S v Pillay and Others (409/2002) [2003] ZASCA 129; [2004] 1 All SA 61 (SCA); [2007] 1 All SA 11 (SCA); 2004 (2) BCLR 158 (SCA); 2004 (2) SACR 419 (SCA) (28 November 2003)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the convictions of accused 7, 10, and 14 could not stand. For accused 7, the evidence against him was not corroborated and the trial court erred in preferring the testimony of state witnesses over credible defence evidence. For accused 10, the only evidence against her was the discovery of stolen money in her house, which was obtained through serious breaches of her constitutional rights, including illegal telephone monitoring and promises of immunity. The court found that admitting such derivative evidence would be detrimental to the administration of justice and excluded it, resulting in her acquittal. For accused 14, although she received large...

Citation
[2003] ZASCA 129
Parties
Appellant: Nugalen Gopal Pillay; Appellant: Devagie Rajnarain; Appellant: Munjoo Lutchmenarain; Appellant: Clive Rubenderan Gounden; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 November 2003
Case Number
409/2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Convictions and Sentences; Applications for Leave to Appeal and Condonation; Trial Within a Trial on Admissibility of Evidence
Outcome
Appeals of accused 7, 10, and 14 are upheld; their convictions and sentences are set aside. Appeal of accused 9 is dismissed.
Judges
MPATI DP, SCOTT JA, MOTATA AJA
Legal Topics
Accessory After the Fact, Money Laundering, Admissibility of Derivative Evidence, Constitutional Rights Violation, Search and Seizure, Self Incrimination
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Accessory After the Fact Money Laundering Admissibility of Derivative Evidence Constitutional Rights Violation Search and Seizure Self Incrimination

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 5 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nugalen Gopal Pillay

Appellant

Devagie Rajnarain

Appellant

Munjoo Lutchmenarain

Appellant

Clive Rubenderan Gounden

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Convictions and Sentences; Applications for Leave to Appeal and Condonation; Trial Within a Trial on Admissibility of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the convictions of the appellants as accessories after the fact to robbery were justified.
  2. 2 Whether derivative evidence obtained through unconstitutional means is admissible.
  3. 3 Whether the trial court erred in admitting evidence obtained from illegal telephone monitoring and promises of immunity.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the convictions of accused 7, 10, and 14 could not stand. For accused 7, the evidence against him was not corroborated and the trial court erred in preferring the testimony of state witnesses over credible defence evidence. For accused 10, the only evidence against her was the discovery of stolen money in her house, which was obtained through serious breaches of her constitutional rights, including illegal telephone monitoring and promises of immunity. The court found that admitting such derivative evidence would be detrimental to the administration of justice and excluded it, resulting in her acquittal. For accused 14, although she received large...

Court Disposition

Appeals of accused 7, 10, and 14 are upheld; their convictions and sentences are set aside. Appeal of accused 9 is dismissed.

Orders

  • Condonation is granted to accused 7 for the late filing of his application for leave to appeal.
  • Leave to appeal is granted to accused 7.