Seloana and Others v Director of Public Prosecutions and Others (4019/2020) [2021] ZAFSHC 280 (11 October 2021)

Seloana and Others v Director of Public Prosecutions and Others (4019/2020) [2021] ZAFSHC 280 (11 October 2021)

The court found that the applicants failed to meet the threshold for leave to appeal as set out in section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act. The applicants merely repeated arguments from their review application and distorted the factual basis of their case. The court clarified that its previous judgment did not exempt the third respondent from providing reasons; in fact, the third respondent had complied with an order to furnish the record and reasons. The grounds advanced by the applicants were adequately addressed in the main judgment, and no reasonable prospect exists that another court would reach a different conclusion. There are no compelling reasons to grant leave to appeal.

Citation
[2021] ZAFSHC 280
Parties
Applicant: Sechaba Seloana; Applicant: Mmuso Seloana; Applicant: Abraham Itumeleng Popa; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions; Respondent: National Director of Public Prosecutions; Respondent: Honourable Magistrate Mr Choene
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 October 2021
Case Number
4019/2020
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
NS Daniso, NM Mbhele
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Courts, Transfer of Criminal Cases, Review Proceedings, Leave to Appeal, Costs Award
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Jurisdiction of Courts Transfer of Criminal Cases Review Proceedings Leave to Appeal Costs Award

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 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sechaba Seloana

Applicant

Mmuso Seloana

Applicant

Abraham Itumeleng Popa

Applicant

Director of Public Prosecutions

Respondent

National Director of Public Prosecutions

Respondent

Honourable Magistrate Mr Choene

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Dismissal of Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have demonstrated reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the district court had jurisdiction to adjudicate the applicants' case.
  3. 3 Whether the transfer of the case from the district court to the high court was lawful under the Criminal Procedure Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to meet the threshold for leave to appeal as set out in section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act. The applicants merely repeated arguments from their review application and distorted the factual basis of their case. The court clarified that its previous judgment did not exempt the third respondent from providing reasons; in fact, the third respondent had complied with an order to furnish the record and reasons. The grounds advanced by the applicants were adequately addressed in the main judgment, and no reasonable prospect exists that another court would reach a different conclusion. There are no compelling reasons to grant leave to appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.