Savoi and Others v National Prosecuting Authority and Another (5867/2013P) [2021] ZAKZPHC 7; [2021] 2 All SA 578 (KZP); 2021 (2) SACR 278 (KZP) (29 January 2021)

Savoi and Others v National Prosecuting Authority and Another (5867/2013P) [2021] ZAKZPHC 7; [2021] 2 All SA 578 (KZP); 2021 (2) SACR 278 (KZP) (29 January 2021)

The applicants failed to establish a factual foundation for their claim of legal professional privilege over the listed documents. The descriptions provided in annexure K were generic and lacked sufficient detail to enable the court to determine privilege. The open court principle is constitutionally entrenched and may only be departed from in special cases, which the applicants did not prove. The Nkosi AJ order remains binding and precludes this court from considering the privileged documents until the criminal court decides on privilege. The court lacks jurisdiction over the Northern Cape matters, as jurisdiction is determined by statute and not by agreement. The applicants are not...

Citation
[2021] ZAKZPHC 7
Parties
Applicant: Gaston Savoi; Applicant: Intaka Holdings (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Fernando Praderi; Respondent: National Prosecuting Authority; Respondent: South African Police Service
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 January 2021
Case Number
5867/2013P
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interlocutory Application Under S 32 of the Superior Courts Act Seeking in Camera Hearing and Confidentiality Undertakings Prior to Permanent Stay Application.
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel where so employed.
Judges
Steyn, Kruger, Henriques
Legal Topics
Open Court Principle, Legal Professional Privilege, In Camera Hearings, Special Case Exception, Jurisdiction, Confidentiality Undertakings
Civil Procedure Criminal Law Open Court Principle Legal Professional Privilege In Camera Hearings Special Case Exception Jurisdiction Confidentiality Undertakings

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gaston Savoi

Applicant

Intaka Holdings (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Fernando Praderi

Applicant

National Prosecuting Authority

Respondent

South African Police Service

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Interlocutory Application Under S 32 of the Superior Courts Act Seeking in Camera Hearing and Confidentiality Undertakings Prior to Permanent Stay Application.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have established a 'special case' under s 32 of the Superior Courts Act justifying a partial hearing in camera.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have placed sufficient evidence before the court to support a claim of legal professional privilege over the listed documents.
  3. 3 Whether the Nkosi AJ order precludes this court from considering the privileged documents.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to establish a factual foundation for their claim of legal professional privilege over the listed documents. The descriptions provided in annexure K were generic and lacked sufficient detail to enable the court to determine privilege. The open court principle is constitutionally entrenched and may only be departed from in special cases, which the applicants did not prove. The Nkosi AJ order remains binding and precludes this court from considering the privileged documents until the criminal court decides on privilege. The court lacks jurisdiction over the Northern Cape matters, as jurisdiction is determined by statute and not by agreement. The applicants are not...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel where so employed.

Orders

  • The applicants’ application in terms of s 32 of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 is dismissed with costs, such costs to include the costs of two counsel where so employed.