Wildschitt v S (A381/2009) [2009] ZAWCHC 206 (3 December 2009)

Wildschitt v S (A381/2009) [2009] ZAWCHC 206 (3 December 2009)

The application for leave to appeal was refused because the underlying criminal proceedings against the applicant had been concluded, rendering the appeal academic. The court found that even if the appeal were successful, it would have no practical effect or result for the parties, as there was no possibility of the applicant being rearrested or required to bring a fresh bail application. The respondent's concern about precedent did not justify granting leave to appeal in circumstances where the matter had become moot. The court relied on established principles that appeals should not be entertained where they serve no practical purpose and that subsequent events may be considered in...

Citation
[2009] ZAWCHC 206
Parties
Applicant: Adriaan Wildschutt; Respondent: The State
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 December 2009
Case Number
A381/2009
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Review Judgment
Outcome
Leave to appeal is refused.
Judges
Thring, Baartman
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Bail Application, Academic Interest, Precedent, Practical Effect
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Bail Application Academic Interest Precedent Practical Effect

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

Adriaan Wildschutt

Applicant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Review Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted when the underlying criminal proceedings have been finally disposed of.
  2. 2 Whether the appeal would have any practical effect or result for the parties.
  3. 3 Whether the creation of a precedent justifies granting leave to appeal in circumstances where the matter has become academic.

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal was refused because the underlying criminal proceedings against the applicant had been concluded, rendering the appeal academic. The court found that even if the appeal were successful, it would have no practical effect or result for the parties, as there was no possibility of the applicant being rearrested or required to bring a fresh bail application. The respondent's concern about precedent did not justify granting leave to appeal in circumstances where the matter had become moot. The court relied on established principles that appeals should not be entertained where they serve no practical purpose and that subsequent events may be considered in...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal is refused.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is refused.
  • No order as to costs.