South Africa Case Law

Van Veen v Director of Public Prosecutions, Western Cape and Others (2280/2022)

Van Veen v Director of Public Prosecutions, Western Cape and Others (2280/2022) [2023] ZAWCHC 174; 2023 (2) SACR 370 (WCC) (31 July 2023)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

2280/2022

Judge

Binns-Ward

The court found that while the delay in prosecuting the applicant was inordinate and unreasonable, the applicant failed to provide substantiating detail of material trial-related prejudice resulting from the delay, apart from his medical condition. The medical evidence established that the applicant suffered intellectual disability due to a brain tumour, rendering him unable to participate meaningfully in his defence. However, the Criminal Procedure Act provides a specific mechanism (sections 77 and 79) for addressing accused persons' incapacity to stand trial, and the principle of subsidiari…

Source excerpt

• Permanent Stay Of Prosecution
• Unreasonable Delay
• Trial Related Prejudice
• Mental Incapacity
• Subsidiarity Principle
• Adequate Alternative Remedy

Lumka v Director of Public Prosecutions Gauteng Division, Pretoria (A198/2021)

Lumka v Director of Public Prosecutions Gauteng Division, Pretoria (A198/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 77 (7 February 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A198/2021

Judges

Noko, Baqwa, Van der Westhuizen

The court dismissed an appeal against refusal of a permanent stay of prosecution, holding the delay and alleged lost evidence did not justify stopping a serious murder case.

• Permanent Stay Of Prosecution
• Right To Speedy Trial
• Trial Related Prejudice
• Delay In Prosecution
• Fair Trial Rights
• Permanent-stay-of-prosecution

Botha and Another v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others (1417/2016)

Botha and Another v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others (1417/2016) [2017] ZAFSHC 58 (23 March 2017)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

1417/2016

Judge

J.J. Mhlambi

The court held that the applicants failed to demonstrate irreparable trial-related prejudice or extraordinary circumstances justifying a permanent stay of prosecution. The delay in prosecution was not unreasonable in the context of the facts, as the applicants were aware of the charges well before the destruction of documents and had the opportunity to retain relevant evidence. The applicants did not provide a detailed account of the missing documents or their significance to the defence. Furthermore, the remedies available under section 342A of the Criminal Procedure Act had not been exhaust…

Source excerpt

• Permanent Stay Of Prosecution
• Trial Related Prejudice
• Unreasonable Delay
• Section 342a Criminal Procedure Act

Eleveld and Others v Mabile and Another (A747 and A748/12)

Eleveld and Others v Mabile and Another (A747 and A748/12) [2013] ZAGPPHC 83 (15 March 2013)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A747 and A748/12

Judges

H.L. Alberts, V.V Tlhapi

High Court review dismissed applications to permanently stay regional court prosecutions, holding the magistrate lacked jurisdiction and no exceptional prejudice was shown.

• Permanent Stay Of Prosecution
• Trial Related Prejudice
• Magistrates Court Jurisdiction
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Fair Trial Rights
• Judicial Review

Zanner v Director of Public Prosecutions, Johannesburg (107/05)

Zanner v Director of Public Prosecutions, Johannesburg (107/05) [2006] ZASCA 56; 2006 (2) SACR 45 (SCA); [2006] 2 All SA 588 (SCA); 2006 (11) BCLR 1327 (SCA) (3 April 2006)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

107/05

Judges

MML Maya, Scott, Van Heerden, Nugent, Cachalia

The court held that while there was a lengthy delay between the withdrawal of the original charge and the renewed prosecution, the appellant failed to establish actual trial-related prejudice. The appellant had sufficient time to prepare his defence, key witnesses remained available, and any fading of memory would equally affect both parties. The withdrawal of the charge did not guarantee immunity from future prosecution, and the seriousness of the offence weighed against granting a permanent stay. Vague and speculative allegations of prejudice were insufficient. The right to a fair trial und…

Source excerpt

• Right To Fair Trial
• Unreasonable Delay
• Permanent Stay Of Prosecution
• Section 35 Constitution
• Trial Related Prejudice