S v Botha (562/2004)
S v Botha (562/2004) [2005] ZASCA 102; [2006] 4 All SA 113 (SCA); 2006 (1) SACR 105 (SCA) (15 November 2005)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that although joint representation in the presence of conflicting interests can constitute an irregularity, in this case the appellant was fully aware of the potential conflict before trial and made a conscious decision to align his defence with the other accused. He had the benefit of legal advice and chose not to distance himself from the co-accused, despite knowing the facts that could have supported a separate defence. The court found that the alleged irregularity did not result in prejudice to the appellant, as his own instructions were followed and the e…
Source excerpt
- Conflict Of Interest
- Joint Representation
- Irregularity In Trial
- Common Purpose
- Criminal Procedure Act Section 317