Stevens and Others v Swart NO and Others (2012/38742) [2013] ZAGPJHC 239; 2014 (2) SA 150 (GSJ) (15 August 2013)

Stevens and Others v Swart NO and Others (2012/38742) [2013] ZAGPJHC 239; 2014 (2) SA 150 (GSJ) (15 August 2013)

Rule 53(1)(b) only empowers the court to compel the presiding officer whose decision is under review to produce the record. The applicants cannot use Rule 30A to enforce compliance with Rule 53(1)(b) against respondents other than the magistrate. The magistrate has complied with her obligations to the extent possible, having produced the available record and explained any non-compliance. Disputes regarding privilege, confidentiality, or relevance of documents held by third parties cannot be resolved within the Rule 53 process and should be addressed through the Promotion of Access to Information Act, which provides appropriate procedures and safeguards. There is no basis for an order...

Citation
[2013] ZAGPJHC 239
Parties
Applicant: Mark Walter Stevens & 19 Others; Respondent: Magistrate Theresa Swart NO; Respondent: Warrant Officer Stony Steenkamp; Respondent: Capt. Peter Alan Stolterfoht; Respondent: Col. Steyn, N.O., The Commander; Respondent: Minister of Police N.O.; Respondent: National Prosecuting Authority, c/o Director of Public Prosecutions, South Gauteng; Respondent: Investec Bank Limited; Respondent: Nedbank Limited; Respondent: BOE Stock Brokers (Pty) Limited
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 August 2013
Case Number
2012/38742
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application to Compel Production of Record Under Rule 53(1)(b) Via Rule 30 a
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Fisher
Legal Topics
Rule 53 Review, Production of Record, Privilege and Confidentiality, Access to Information, Criminal Investigation, Costs Order
Civil Procedure Criminal Law Rule 53 Review Production of Record Privilege and Confidentiality Access to Information Criminal Investigation Costs Order

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Walter Stevens & 19 Others

Applicant

Magistrate Theresa Swart NO

Respondent

Warrant Officer Stony Steenkamp

Respondent

Capt. Peter Alan Stolterfoht

Respondent

Col. Steyn, N.O., The Commander

Respondent

Minister of Police N.O.

Respondent

National Prosecuting Authority, c/o Director of Public Prosecutions, South Gauteng

Respondent

Investec Bank Limited

Respondent

Nedbank Limited

Respondent

BOE Stock Brokers (Pty) Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application to Compel Production of Record Under Rule 53(1)(b) Via Rule 30 a

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Rule 30A can be used to compel production of the record under Rule 53(1)(b) from respondents other than the presiding magistrate.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are entitled to the full record, including confidential or privileged documents, for purposes of review.
  3. 3 Whether the magistrate complied with her obligations under Rule 53(1)(b).

Ratio Decidendi

Rule 53(1)(b) only empowers the court to compel the presiding officer whose decision is under review to produce the record. The applicants cannot use Rule 30A to enforce compliance with Rule 53(1)(b) against respondents other than the magistrate. The magistrate has complied with her obligations to the extent possible, having produced the available record and explained any non-compliance. Disputes regarding privilege, confidentiality, or relevance of documents held by third parties cannot be resolved within the Rule 53 process and should be addressed through the Promotion of Access to Information Act, which provides appropriate procedures and safeguards. There is no basis for an order...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs, such costs to include the costs of two counsel.