South Africa Case Law

Lethoko and Another v Minister of Defence and Another (4338/2019)

Lethoko and Another v Minister of Defence and Another (4338/2019) [2021] ZAFSHC 160; 2021 (2) SACR 661 (FB) (16 August 2021)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

4338/2019

Judge

Opperman

The court found that the delay in finalising the criminal proceedings, spanning from 2006 to 2021, was caused by all parties involved, including the presiding officers, applicants, and the first respondent. Despite the lengthy delay, the charges against the applicants are serious, involving theft from their employer and the public. The evidence against the applicants is strong, and they are represented by experienced counsel. The court held that the applicants did not suffer trial-related prejudice sufficient to justify a permanent stay of prosecution; other prejudices, such as loss of promot…

Source excerpt

• Stay Of Prosecution
• Unreasonable Delay
• Fair Trial Rights
• Section 342a Criminal Procedure Act
• Constitutional Rights
• Costs Orders

Swanepoel and Another v S (23004/2021)

Swanepoel and Another v S (23004/2021) [2021] ZAGPPHC 432; 2021 (2) SACR 374 (GP) (19 April 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

23004/2021

Judge

Nyathi

The court held that the applicants were never formally called as section 204 witnesses and did not testify in court against their co-accused, Van Zyl, who died before trial. Therefore, the statutory conditions for indemnity under section 204 were not met. The alleged agreement or legitimate expectation did not create a binding contract or confer immunity from prosecution. The State, as dominus litis, retained the discretion to proceed with charges, and its decision was neither unconstitutional nor procedurally unfair. The applicants' constitutional rights were not infringed, as they were not…

Source excerpt

• Section 204 Witness
• Legitimate Expectation
• Stay Of Prosecution
• Just Administrative Action
• Indemnity In Criminal Procedure

Lumka v National Director of Public Prosecutions. Gauteng Division Pretoria (8510/2020)

Lumka v National Director of Public Prosecutions. Gauteng Division Pretoria (8510/2020) [2020] ZAGPPHC 16 (21 February 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

8510/2020

Judge

A Millar

The court found that while the delay of over ten years was lengthy, it was not in itself dispositive. The reasons for the delay were largely administrative and not intended to prejudice the applicant. The applicant contributed to any prejudice by withholding his alibi evidence for over a decade, and the loss of corroborating evidence was a consequence of his own actions. The seriousness of the charges and the interests of the victims and society in seeing justice done outweighed any prejudice claimed by the applicant. The applicant did not suffer any limitation of rights during the period of…

Source excerpt

• Stay Of Prosecution
• Right To Fair Trial
• Prejudice Due To Delay
• Murder
• Attempted Murder

Brass and Others v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Another (73283/2017)

Brass and Others v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Another (73283/2017) [2018] ZAGPPHC 660 (30 August 2018)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

73283/2017

Judge

Raulinga

The court stayed criminal prosecution against the applicants, holding that res judicata did not apply and that related cannabis constitutional challenges justified a pause.

• Stay Of Prosecution
• Money Laundering
• Possession Of Cannabis
• Constitutional Challenge
• Res Judicata
• Stay-of-prosecution

Austin v Minister of Justice and Others, Clarke v Minister of Justice and Others (281/2018, 282/2017)

Austin v Minister of Justice and Others, Clarke v Minister of Justice and Others (281/2018, 282/2017) [2018] ZAECGHC 34; 2018 (2) SACR 49 (ECG) (9 May 2018)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

281/2017; 282/2017

Judge

M.J. Lowe

The court found that, given the pending Constitutional Court appeal on the constitutionality of the relevant drug laws and the persuasive precedent of stays granted in similar cases, it would be contrary to the interests of justice and wasteful of public resources to proceed with the criminal prosecutions against the applicants at this stage. The court emphasized that the discretion to grant a stay must be exercised judiciously, considering the individual circumstances and the potential impact of the higher court's decision on the charges. The applicants were required to institute constitutio…

Source excerpt

• Stay Of Prosecution
• Constitutionality Of Drug Laws
• Personal Consumption Defence
• Suspension Of Invalidity
• Prosecutorial Discretion

Sayed and Others v S (530/2017)

Sayed and Others v S (530/2017) [2017] ZASCA 156; 2018 (1) SACR 185 (SCA) (24 November 2017)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

530/2017

Judges

Ponnan, Petse, Willis, Lamont, Schippers

The Supreme Court of Appeal refused condonation for the late filing of the notice of appeal and the appeal record, finding the explanation for the delay wholly inadequate and the degree of non-compliance extreme. The court held that the appellants' attorney neglected his duties and that the responsibility for compliance with court rules ultimately rests with the litigant. The special plea of autrefois acquit was rejected because the previous acquittal was not on the merits but due to gross irregularities in the initial trial, which rendered the proceedings invalid and allowed for a retrial. T…

Source excerpt

• Condonation
• Autrefois Acquit
• Stay Of Prosecution
• Judicial Bias
• Criminal Procedure Act
• Constitutional Rights

Mohan v Director of Public Prosecutions KwaZulu-Natal (3626/2016)

Mohan v Director of Public Prosecutions KwaZulu-Natal (3626/2016) [2017] ZAKZDHC 5; 2017 (2) SACR 76 (KZD) (7 February 2017)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

3626/2016

Judge

M R Chetty

The court dismissed an application to stay three criminal prosecutions, finding material non-disclosure, no proved trial prejudice, and no basis to interfere with prosecutorial discretion.

• Stay Of Prosecution
• Fair Trial Rights
• Vat Fraud
• Non Disclosure
• Separation Of Powers
• Interdict Requirements

Arendse v Magistrate, Wynberg and Others (3866/2015)

Arendse v Magistrate, Wynberg and Others (3866/2015) [2016] ZAWCHC 81; [2016] 3 All SA 707 (WCC); 2017 (1) SACR 403 (WCC) (24 June 2016)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

3866/2015

Judge

Bozalek

The High Court dismissed an application to deem a criminal sentence served after long delay, holding the delay was largely caused by the applicant himself.

• Delay In Execution Of Sentence
• Right To Fair Trial
• Bill Of Rights Limitation
• Stay Of Prosecution
• Judicial Review Of Administrative Action
• Delay-in-execution-of-sentence

M3D Developers (Pty) Ltd and Another v National Director of Public Prosecutions N.O and Others (M372/2014)

M3D Developers (Pty) Ltd and Another v National Director of Public Prosecutions N.O and Others (M372/2014) [2015] ZANWHC 70 (29 October 2015)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

M372/2014

Judge

Kgoele

The court found that the applicants failed to provide sufficient detail or proof regarding the documents allegedly seized and not returned. The respondents provided inventories and police dockets listing the items returned, and a forensically sound image of the lost laptop was made available to the applicants. The court held that disputes regarding the existence and return of documents, and any resulting prejudice, are matters for the trial court to determine. The applicants did not establish irreparable trial prejudice or infringement of their right to a fair trial sufficient to warrant a st…

Source excerpt

• Stay Of Prosecution
• Trial Prejudice
• Loss Of Evidence
• Right To Fair Trial

Hartley v Presiding Magistrate D Court Krugersdorp Magistrates Court and Others (02538/2015)

Hartley v Presiding Magistrate D Court Krugersdorp Magistrates Court and Others (02538/2015) [2015] ZAGPJHC 75 (21 April 2015)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

02538/2015

Judge

Satchwell

The High Court dismissed an application to stay a criminal prosecution for alleged unreasonable delay, holding that section 342A issues should first be addressed in the trial court.

• Stay Of Prosecution
• Unreasonable Delay
• Section 342a Criminal Procedure Act
• Constitutional Right To Fair Trial
• Stay-of-prosecution
• Unreasonable-delay