South Africa Case Law

S v Maloma (A376/2015)

S v Maloma (A376/2015) [2015] ZAGPPHC 496 (11 June 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A376/2015

Judges

Bam, DM Lambo, S Potterill

The court held that the administration of the oath by the interpreter in the presence of the judicial officer is consistent with the provisions of section 162, read with section 165, of the Criminal Procedure Act. The North West Division's decision in Pilane v The State did not consider section 165, which expressly allows for the interpreter to administer the oath under judicial supervision. Therefore, no irregularity was committed, and the evidence was admissible. The doctrine of stare decisis binds lower courts to High Court decisions unless overturned by a higher court or another High Cour…

Source excerpt

• Administration Of Oaths
• Criminal Procedure Act Section 162
• Criminal Procedure Act Section 165
• Admissibility Of Evidence