S v Sefutho (26/2002) [2002] ZANWHC 34 (19 September 2002)

S v Sefutho (26/2002) [2002] ZANWHC 34 (19 September 2002)

The court held that the appellant's failure to apply for leave to appeal rendered the appeal not properly before the court. Although sections 309B and 309C of the Criminal Procedure Act were declared unconstitutional in S v Steyn, the Constitutional Court suspended the declaration of invalidity for six months, limiting its retrospective effect. As a result, appeals arising from convictions and sentences imposed before the declaration of invalidity took effect on 29 May 2001 must be governed by the procedures applicable prior to that date. Since the appellant did not comply with these procedures, the appeal was struck off the roll.

Citation
[2002] ZANWHC 34
Parties
Appellant: Thabang Lazarus Sefotho; Respondent: The State
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 September 2002
Case Number
26/2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Hearing; Point in Limine Raised Regarding Procedural Validity
Outcome
Appeal struck off the roll due to procedural non-compliance.
Judges
M M Leeuw, J P Friedman
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Declaration of Invalidity, Retrospective Effect, Criminal Procedure Act, Constitutional Review
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Declaration of Invalidity Retrospective Effect Criminal Procedure Act Constitutional Review

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

Thabang Lazarus Sefotho

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Hearing; Point in Limine Raised Regarding Procedural Validity

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appeal is properly before the court in light of the requirements for leave to appeal under sections 309B and 309C of the Criminal Procedure Act.
  2. 2 Whether the suspension of the declaration of invalidity in S v Steyn affects the appellant's right to appeal without leave.
  3. 3 What procedures govern appeals initiated before and after the invalidation of sections 309B and 309C.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the appellant's failure to apply for leave to appeal rendered the appeal not properly before the court. Although sections 309B and 309C of the Criminal Procedure Act were declared unconstitutional in S v Steyn, the Constitutional Court suspended the declaration of invalidity for six months, limiting its retrospective effect. As a result, appeals arising from convictions and sentences imposed before the declaration of invalidity took effect on 29 May 2001 must be governed by the procedures applicable prior to that date. Since the appellant did not comply with these procedures, the appeal was struck off the roll.

Court Disposition

Appeal struck off the roll due to procedural non-compliance.

Orders

  • The appeal is struck off the roll.