Sodi and Others v S In re S v Mokhesi and Others (45/2021) [2022] ZAFSHC 244 (16 September 2022)

Sodi and Others v S In re S v Mokhesi and Others (45/2021) [2022] ZAFSHC 244 (16 September 2022)

The court found that none of the applicants met the stringent threshold for leave to appeal as set out in section 17 of the Superior Courts Act. The grounds advanced were either already dealt with in the main judgment or were not supported by the facts or law. The court emphasized that preliminary litigation prior to criminal trial is discouraged and that issues such as admissibility of evidence and constitutional challenges should be determined by the trial court. The alleged case management order by JP Musi did not require preliminary issues to be determined before trial. The court also found that the State's alleged non-compliance with PRECCA did not render the charges invalid at this...

Citation
[2022] ZAFSHC 244
Parties
Applicant: Pheane Edwin Sodi; Applicant: Blackhead Consulting (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Thabane Wiseman Zulu; Applicant: Elias Sekgobela Magashule; Respondent: The State
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
16 September 2022
Case Number
45/2021
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Preliminary Applications Prior to Criminal Trial
Outcome
All applications for leave to appeal are dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Naidoo
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Preliminary Litigation, Declaratory Relief, Condonation, Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act, Criminal Procedure Act
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Preliminary Litigation Declaratory Relief Condonation Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act Criminal Procedure Act

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pheane Edwin Sodi

Applicant

Blackhead Consulting (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Thabane Wiseman Zulu

Applicant

Elias Sekgobela Magashule

Applicant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Preliminary Applications Prior to Criminal Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have met the threshold for leave to appeal under section 17 of the Superior Courts Act.
  2. 2 Whether preliminary litigation prior to the criminal trial should be entertained.
  3. 3 Whether the State's alleged non-compliance with section 27 of PRECCA renders charges incompetent or invalid.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that none of the applicants met the stringent threshold for leave to appeal as set out in section 17 of the Superior Courts Act. The grounds advanced were either already dealt with in the main judgment or were not supported by the facts or law. The court emphasized that preliminary litigation prior to criminal trial is discouraged and that issues such as admissibility of evidence and constitutional challenges should be determined by the trial court. The alleged case management order by JP Musi did not require preliminary issues to be determined before trial. The court also found that the State's alleged non-compliance with PRECCA did not render the charges invalid at this...

Court Disposition

All applications for leave to appeal are dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal brought by Pheane Edwin Sodi and Blackhead Consulting (Pty) Ltd is dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
  • The application for leave to appeal brought by Thabane Wiseman Zulu is dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.