S v Murashi (CRB 184 of 2013) [2015] ZWHHC 158 (15 February 2015)

S v Murashi (CRB 184 of 2013) [2015] ZWHHC 158 (15 February 2015)

There are no cogent grounds for review as the complaints relate to findings of fact, not procedural irregularity, bias, or lack of jurisdiction; the proceedings were in accordance with both procedural and substantive law.

Citation
[2015] ZWHHC 158
Parties
Prosecution: The State; Accused: Joseph Murashi
Court
Harare High Court
Jurisdiction
Zimbabwe
Judgment Date
15 February 2015
Case Number
CRB 184 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Review / Post Acquittal Review
Outcome
Review dismissed
Legal Topics
Rape, Acquittal, Review of Magistrate's Court Proceedings
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Judicial Review Rape Acquittal Review of Magistrate's Court Proceedings

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

The State

Prosecution

Joseph Murashi

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Review / Post Acquittal Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the acquittal of the accused is reviewable by the High Court
  2. 2 Whether the grounds for review as per the High Court Act are met

Ratio Decidendi

There are no cogent grounds for review as the complaints relate to findings of fact, not procedural irregularity, bias, or lack of jurisdiction; the proceedings were in accordance with both procedural and substantive law.

Court Disposition

Review dismissed