CASE NO. 795/2000 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION) In the matter between: and
|
|
- Theodore Ramsey
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 795/2000 CASE NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION) In the matter between: MARCEL ANDREW MOLEMA PLAINTIFF and MEMBER OF THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL FOR SAFETY & SECURITY NORTH WEST PROVINCE CAPTAIN VICE 1 ST DEFENDANT 2 ND DEFENDANT CIVIL JUDGMENT MOGOENG J. [1] This is an action for damages instituted by Mr Marcel Andrew Molema ( Marcel ), against the MEC for Safety and Security, North West Province and Captain Vice ( Vice ), a member of the South African Police Service (SAPS). It is divided into four claims, namely, (i) claim 1 - assault; (ii) claim 2 - unlawful arrest; (iii) claim 3 - assault; and (iv) claim 4 - unlawful detention. 1
2 [2] It was agreed at the commencement of the proceedings that the onus of proof in respect of claims 1 and 3 would be borne by Marcel and that the Defendants would have to discharge the onus in respect of claims 2 and 4, and that the merits be dealt with first and quantum later. I ordered accordingly. [3] The parties versions are mutually destructive. However, certain facts have become common cause and/or are undisputed. I set them out below: 3.1 Vice s father-in-law was robbed of a safe containing an unspecified amount of money in a farm around Mafikeng; 3.2 As a result, a case of robbery was duly reported at the relevant police station; 3.3 On 28 February 2000 at about 03h00 Vice and other members of the police force arrived at Marcel s home. The stated reason for the visit was a search for a safe and money belonging to Vice s in-laws; 3.4 Marcel and his younger brother, Gavin, and Tebogo Lechuti ( Tebogo ) were apprehended. Tebogo was released on the same day at Kgomongoe Building. The two brothers were taken to Hartebeesfontein police station for detention; 3.5 While at Hartebeesfontein these brothers were allowed to 2
3 call their brother in Mafikeng and Marcel was allowed to visit Dr Stevens on the day of the arrest. 3.6 The injuries which Marcel had, and must have sustained during and/or after his arrest but while in police custody, were a swollen left eye, perforated left eardrum, swollen left cheek and a bruised/scratched right knee which was even bleeding. These were observed by both Dr s Stevens and Malan as well as Inspector Mekgwe. 3.7 Marcel and Gavin were detained on 28 February 2000 at 08h25 and released on 01 March 2000 at 13h05. This means that they were left in detention for about ten hours after the expiry of 48 hours since their arrest. I turn now to the evidence in so far as it relates to the balance of the issues which are in dispute. [4] Marcel testified in the terms that follow. Vice introduced himself upon his arrival and he was not aggressive. His rights were never explained to him. He undertook to show the police the house where the girlfriend of Mojaki Lechuti ( Mojaki ) lived. [5] As they were proceeding to the vehicles, so as to go to that place, Vice struck him behind his head with an open hand. This blow caused him to fall to the ground. He was surprised since this attack was unprovoked. They got to the house in question but Mojaki was not there. A white policeman, other than Vice, 3
4 smacked him across his face once or twice alleging that he was concealing the whereabouts of Mojaki. [6] They then proceeded to Amos House. All policemen, excluding Vice, assaulted him. A certain white policeman hit him with clenched fists several times on his left ear, eye and cheek. Another policeman hit him with an iron rod on his back and waist and right knee several times. He became unconscious. He was then dragged to the combi where his hands were tied, his head was covered with a black cloth and electric shocks were administered to him on his hip and later on his right foot. The police kept on asking him where the safe and the money were during the torture. Over and above the injuries which are not disputed, his hip was sore and swollen and his body was aching as a result of the assault. [7] Gavin s evidence accords with that of Marcel except as would be stated hereafter. He testified that when Mojaki was not found at his girlfriend s house, Vice and three policemen hit Marcel with an iron rod on his back several times. He also said that at Amos House, Vice smacked Marcel whereas the others struck him with an iron rod all over his body as if they were mad. Marcel became unconscious after this attack. He was limping and was dragged by the police from around the corner of Amos House where he had been attacked. All the blows delivered with the rod were forceful and hard. [8] Tebogo said that Vice delivered hard blows to Marcel s head and back several times while black policemen were holding 4
5 him, at the home of Mojaki s girlfriend. He also said that Marcel was struck with an iron rod at Amos House and he appeared to be unconscious. [9] Anis testified that the police smacked Marcel across his face while they were in the backyard of their home and again smacked him behind his head when they were about to leave the premises. As a result of the latter blow, Marcel staggered. He nearly fell but certainly did not fall. Marcel then closed his case after leading the evidence of Inspector Mekgwe, Dr Stevens and Dr Malan regarding the injuries that they saw on his body. [10] The first defence witness was Vice whose evidence is set out below. He introduced himself as Captain Vice of the Murder and Robbery Unit, Klerksdorp, upon his arrival at Marcel s home. He told Marcel that he was a suspect in a robbery case in which his father-in-law was the complainant. Marcel was drunk. As he was explaining to Marcel that he had come to arrest him and also explaining his rights to him, Marcel insulted and grabbed him. They grabbed each other, wrestled with each other, and fell to the ground on their bellies as Vice indicated. Marcel, who was then in front of Vice, fell first and Vice after him. Vice was constrained to use reasonable force to bring Marcel under control. He, inter alia, applied what he referred to as FBI-type tactics to subdue Marcel. He then handcuffed Marcel from behind, put him in a police combi and then explained his rights to him again. 5
6 [11] Marcel undertook to show them the place of residence of Mojaki s girlfriend since they were looking for Mojaki. They went there but did not find Mojaki. Thereafter they went to the house of Mojaki s lawyer, then to Amos House in Mafikeng, where the detectives offices are located, and lastly to the Murder and Robbery offices at Kgomongoe Building in Mmabatho. Tebogo was released and Marcel and Gavin were taken to Hartebeesfontein police station. [12] Vice testified that Marcel was at no stage physically attacked by any member of the SAPS in his presence. He did not dispute the observations made by Mekgwe and the doctors regarding Marcel s injuries. He faintly suggested that, the injuries could have taken place at the time when Marcel was resisting arrest and when they we wrestling and falling. He said he really did not know for certain how Marcel sustained those injuries. [13] Inspector Mothofo testified that Vice introduced himself, explained the purpose of their visit as well as the rights of the suspects. He denied that Marcel was beaten up as alleged by Marcel and his witnesses. According to him, Marcel was intoxicated and aggressive. He resisted arrest, grabbed Vice and he fell twice. He said that he did not notice any injuries on Marcel even as he handed him over to Inspector Mekgwe at Hartebeesfontein. The defence then closed its case. [14] Mrs Gutta, on behalf of Marcel, submitted that since Marcel s witnesses corroborate him on the assault, the Court must find that claims 1 and 3 had been proven on a preponderance of 6
7 probabilities. Furthermore, the evidence of the medical doctors and Inspector Mekgwe have clearly established the existence of the injuries which were sustained during the arrest and detention. The injuries could, so goes the submission, only have been caused by the police as testified to by Marcel, Tebogo, Gavin and Anis. Mrs Gutta submitted, in respect of claim 2, that there was no reasonable suspicion that Marcel had committed the robbery that he was arrested and detained for. Mrs Gutta also submitted that the legal rights of Marcel to apply for bail were not explained, he was not told why he was arrested. As regards claim 4, Mrs Gutta submitted that Marcel was detained beyond 48 hours and was released about 5 hours after the expiry of the 48 hour period. This, according to Mrs Gutta, rendered Marcel s detention unlawful. Mr Hendricks, for the Defendants, submitted that Marcel was not assaulted and that his arrest and detention were lawful. [15] I was not impressed by Marcel, Gavin, Tebogo and Anis as witnesses. They made a very poor impression on me and I am satisfied that they are not credible witnesses. Some of the key unsatisfactory features in their evidence are set out below. Anis testified about two incidents in which Marcel was smacked, while still at his house, which no other person, including Marcel, knew anything about. Marcel, Tebogo and Gavin all testified that several hard blows were delivered to the back of Marcel with an iron rod. However, no trace of an injury which could be said to have been caused by an iron rod was found. In fact, no injury whatsoever was found on the head and back of Marcel. Dr Stevens, who examined the unclad body of 7
8 Marcel on the day on which those injuries were allegedly inflicted, did not see any such injuries and neither did Dr Malan two days later. Furthermore, Marcel neither complained to any of the doctors about any pain on his back, head, hip nor foot. He did not even alert Dr Stevens to the right hip which he said was sore and swollen at the time of the examination by Dr Stevens. This is a fundamental flaw in the evidence of Marcel. None of the witnesses can be heard to claim that he mistakenly thought hard blows with an iron rod or baton were delivered to the body of Marcel several times. It is all or nothing. These witnesses were all very emphatic about the plurality of the strikes and their viciousness. The absence of a trace of any of them in itself does a telling blow to Marcel s case. But this is not all. Marcel, Tebogo and Gavin all said that Marcel became unconscious after the assault at Amos House. This is obviously irreconcilable with the fact that he could still limp as he came from around the corner of Amos House to the combi. How can a person who has fainted be limping at the time of his unconsciousness? Furthermore, how can a person who is being dragged limp? Marcel said that he was smacked by a white policeman once or twice at the house of Mojaki s girlfriend. That white man is not Vice. Gavin said Vice and others assaulted Marcel with an iron rod. Tebogo said that only Vice hit Marcel with what looked like an iron rod. These are also material contradictions between their versions. The victim, Marcel, said someone other than Vice smacked him. He never said anything about the use of the more painful rod at that stage. Gavin and Tebogo were so eager to strengthen Marcel s case that they said an iron rod was used at the house 8
9 of Mojaki s girlfriend. I find all these to be lies and I am satisfied that all of these witnesses were lying. There are other reasons for arriving at this conclusion that I do not consider necessary to burden this judgment with. [16] Vice and Inspector Mothofo gave their evidence exceptionally well. There are no material contradictions in their evidence and I find them to be credible witnesses. [17] Over and above a favourable credibility finding that I make about the Defendants witnesses, the probabilities also favour the Defendants for the reasons that follow: 17.1 On the evidence of Marcel and some of his witnesses, Vice introduced himself, indicated that he was looking for a safe and money that belonged to his father-in-law. It is improbable that he did not at the same time mention that a robbery took place, that Marcel, among others, was suspected of having been involved in the commission of that robbery, that he was arresting him for that reason and that he did not explain Marcel s legal rights. The context in which Vice introduced himself and stated what he was looking for coupled with the fact that Marcel exercised the right to telephone his next of kin and the right to see a doctor upon his arrival at Hartebeesfontein, makes it even more probable that Marcel s rights, including those that he exercised on the same day of his arrest, were explained to him. This is also borne out by an entry, to the effect that his rights were explained to 9
10 him, which was made in the Occurrence Book at the time of his detention Gavin said that as Vice smacked Marcel, the latter almost fell. Marcel himself said that he fell. Vice also said that Marcel, albeit as a result of a different cause, fell to the ground. Vice and Mothofo said that Marcel resisted arrest aggressively. This resulted in a wrestling of sorts between him and Vice which led to both men falling to the ground and on their bellies. This, in my view, is the probable cause of Marcel s knee injury as well as the other injuries that he sustained. It is important to bear in mind that the injuries to Marcel s eye, ear and cheek are all on the left-hand side. The question is whether this was caused by several blows with clenched fists as alleged by Marcel or something else. I am satisfied that on the probabilities these injuries must have been sustained at the time when Marcel fell to the ground, or that while he was on the ground he must have, in his drunken stupor and while continuing to resist arrest, hit the left side of his head against some object or the ground itself. These injuries could also have been sustained during the scuffle preceding or following the fall. I am also satisfied that these injuries were probably caused by a single blow to the left side of the head under the above or related circumstances. They were definitely not caused by the alleged assault. Besides, as I said above, there is not a single credible witness who testified about the injuries on Marcel s behalf. 10
11 17.3 It is highly improbable that Marcel who says that he cooperated with the police would have been singled out for assault out of all the other suspects like Gavin. If they assaulted him to force information out of him, as he says the police kept on asking him about the safe and money as they assaulted and tortured him, why did they not do the same to Gavin? Besides, how could the experienced police at the level of Captain and Inspector have been so stupid as to inflict visible injuries on Marcel in the presence of Gavin and Tebogo and then immediately release Tebogo risking the possibility of him telling other people what the police had just done to Marcel? How could they risk their professions by committing such a criminal offence so openly in the new South Africa? How could they assault Marcel in the presence of Anis and Marcel s sister, and later apparently in the presence of Mojaki s girlfriend and her father? This is highly improbable. [18] On the summons, the arrest of Marcel is alleged to be unlawful on the basis that it was carried out without a warrant. Such an arrest is lawful in terms of s 40(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 if the arresting officer reasonably suspects the suspect of having committed an offence listed in schedule 1 of the Act. Robbery is an offence so listed. Vice had received information that Marcel, two of his brothers and Mojaki were involved in the robbery of which his father-in-law was a victim. He interviewed the informer before the arrest was carried out. 11
12 I am satisfied that his suspicion was reasonable within the meaning of s 40. Mrs Gutta sought to deviate from the summons by alleging that the suspicion was not reasonable, and that Marcel was not informed of his right to apply for bail. None of these were pleaded. Be that as it may I am satisfied that all the rights were explained and that the suspicion to arrest was reasonable. Regarding why the arrest was effected without a warrant, Vice explained that since he received information about the involvement of Marcel and others on Sunday afternoon and he knew of no Magistrate they could obtain a warrant of arrest from at that time, he decided to arrest the suspects without the warrant. [19] The summons attacked the lawfulness of the detention on the basis that it was without any justification or excuse. The Defendants have explained that Marcel was arrested and detained on a reasonable suspicion of involvement in the commission of robbery. This is a lawful ground for detention particularly for a serious offence like robbery. Contrary to the summons, Mrs Gutta then shifted the attack, on the lawfulness of the detention, to the fact that the Defendants did not cause Marcel to appear before the Magistrate before the expiry of 48 hours of his detention. This is not part of Marcel s case before me. In any event Marcel was released about ten hours after the expiry of the 48 hour period envisaged by s 50(1)(c). Furthermore, the provisions of s 50 are in my view, not peremptory but directory. This follows from the provisions of this section, particularly subsection (1)(d). The Legislature is not strict with regard to the observance of the 48 hours. This is 12
13 evident from the leverage given to the State in the stated exceptions allowing the State to have until the end of the next day after the expiry of the 48 hours before presenting the defence before Court. The lower Court in my position would have, in my view, a discretion to excuse the further detention had this issue been specifically pleaded. The import of s 50 is, in my view, that the State would and should ordinarily use its right to further detain an arrested person if the detainee is not brought before Court within 48 hours of his or her arrest. In other words, if the continued detention is not excusable on any of the exceptions specifically provided for in s 50(1)(d), then he or she is entitled to be released since no acceptable or recognised legal basis exist for his or her continued detention. Marcel was released on the very same day on which he should have appeared in court and the mischief that s 50 was intended to address disappeared with his release. That mischief, I may add, is the notorious long or indefinite detention without trial of yesteryear. [20] In view of the aforegoing, I am satisfied that Marcel failed dismally to discharge his onus in respect of claims 1 and 3 on a preponderance of probabilities. On the other hand the Defendants proved the lawfulness of the arrest and the detention (claims 2 and 4 respectively) on a balance of probabilities. All four claims, therefore, fall to be dismissed. I turn now to the question of costs. [21] Ordinarily, costs follow the result. However, I believe that the police, of all people must take the lead in the observance of the 13
14 spirit and the terms of the law. Whereas I am alive to the fact that it has never been part of Marcel s case that the detention was unlawful for the reason that he was kept for longer than 48 hours, the reality of the situation is that Marcel was indeed detained for much longer than 48 hours since his arrest, contrary to the spirit of s 50(1)(c). As a mark of this Court s disapproval of the police s continued detention of Marcel beyond the 48 hour period, the Defendants, though successful, would not be entitled to their costs particularly because there is no explanation whatsoever for the delay. [22] In the result, the following order is made: (b) (a) all four claims are dismissed; and there will be no order as to costs. M.T.R. MOGOENG JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT 14
15
16
17 APPEARANCES DATE OF HEARING : MARCH 2002 DATE OF JUDGMENT : 08 MARCH 2002 COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF : ADV N. GUTTA COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS : ADV R.D HENDRICKS ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS : SMIT STANTON & MOTLHABANI INC : THE STATE ATTORNEY
MEDIA STATEMENT CRIMINAL JUSTICE BRANCH
MEDIA STATEMENT CRIMINAL JUSTICE BRANCH December 23, 2014 14-28 No Charges Approved in Abbotsford IIO Investigation Victoria The Criminal Justice Branch, Ministry of Justice (CJB) announced today that
More informationANTHONY ROMANAHENG MODIKOE MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY J U D G M E N T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE PORT ELIZABETH) NOT REPORTABLE Case No.: 2927/2010 Date heard: 27-30 August 2012 Date delivered: 13 December 2012 In the matter between: ANTHONY ROMANAHENG
More informationREPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG) NOMCEBO SYLVIA CWAILE
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG) (1) REPORTABLE: NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES (3) REVISED CASE NO: 2012/45728 24 OCTOBER 2014
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT : MTHATHA CASE NO. 1299/06. In the matter between: and THE MINSTER OF SAFETY JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT : MTHATHA CASE NO. 1299/06 In the matter between: THANDILE FUNDA Plaintiff and THE MINSTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY Defendant JUDGMENT MILLER, J.:
More informationSOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, JOHANNESBURG
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO: 2009/5959 DATE:26/08/2011 REPORTABLE (1) REPORTABLE: YES / NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO (3) REVISED...... DATE SIGNATURE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN CASE NO. CA 107/2017 APPEAL JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN CASE NO. CA 107/2017 In the matter between: NATASHA GOLIATH Appellant and THE MINISTER OF POLICE Respondent APPEAL JUDGMENT Bloem J
More informationMINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY JUDGMENT
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION MTHATHA Case No. 2074/11 Date heard: 25/2/15 Date delivered: 27/2/15 Not reportable In the matter between: VUYISA SOFIKA Plaintiff and MINISTER
More informationIN THE NORTH WEST HIGH COURT, MAFIKENG MOENYANE MODISE HUNTER THE MINISTER OF POLICE
Reportable: Circulate to Judges: Circulate to Magistrates: Circulate to Regional Magistrates: YES / NO YES / NO YES / NO YES / NO In the matter between: IN THE NORTH WEST HIGH COURT, MAFIKENG CASE NO:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION, PORT ELIZABETH) CASE NO.: 2589/2012 In the matter between: MLINDELI DAVID SEPTEMBER
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG (1) REPORTABLE: YES / NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO (3) REVISED... DATE SIGNATURE ) CASE NUMBER: 13/45391 HEARD: 29 FEBRUARY
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION) DOUW DE BEER ACCUSED 1 DYLLAN DOUW DE BEER ACCUSED 2
REPORTABLE CASE NO. CC 104/2005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION) In the matter between: THE STATE and DOUW DE BEER ACCUSED 1 DYLLAN DOUW DE BEER ACCUSED 2 JUDGMENT
More informationJUDGMENT THE MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY. Neutral citation: Minister of Safety and Security v Katise(328/12) [2013] ZASCA 111 (16 September 2013)
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT In the matter between: REPORTABLE Case No: 328/12 THE MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY APPELLANT and BONISILE JOHN KATISE RESPONDENT Neutral citation:
More informationREPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH
More informationindependent and effective investigations and reviews PIRC/00444/17 October 2018 Report of a Complaint Handling Review in relation to Police Scotland
independent and effective investigations and reviews PIRC/00444/17 October 2018 Report of a Complaint Handling Review in relation to Police Scotland What we do We obtain all the material information from
More informationSummary of Investigation SiRT File # Referral from RCMP - PEI December 4, 2017
Summary of Investigation SiRT File # 2017-036 Referral from RCMP - PEI December 4, 2017 John L. Scott Interim Director June 12, 2018 Background: On December 4, 2017, SiRT Interim Director, John Scott,
More information1. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF GRENADA 2. MARCIA TOUSSAINT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GRENADA AND THE WEST INDIES ASSOCIATED STATES HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE GRENADA CLAIM NO. GDAHCV2006/0160 BETWEEN: ALBERTHA STEPHEN CLAIMANT and 1. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF GRENADA 2.
More informationNo Appeal. (PC )
Supreme Court No. 2003-68-Appeal. (PC 00-1179) Jose Cruz : v. : Town of North Providence. : NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Rhode Island Reporter. Readers are
More informationPOLICE AND CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT 1984 CODE G CODE OF PRACTICE FOR THE STATUTORY POWER OF ARREST BY POLICE OFFICERS
POLICE AND CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT 1984 CODE CODE OF PRACTICE FOR THE STATUTORY POWER OF ARREST BY POLICE OFFICERS Commencement This Code applies to any arrest made by a police officer after midnight on
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION, MTHATHA) CASE NO: 426/2014. In the matter between: And MINISTER OF SAFETY & SECURITY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION, MTHATHA) CASE NO: 426/2014 Heard on: 14 October 2015 Delivered on: 10 March 2016 In the matter between: KHONAYE DLOKOLO Plaintiff And MINISTER
More informationFREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. In the matter between:- FRANCIS RALENTSOE MOLOI
FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA Case No. : 3861/2013 In the matter between:- FRANCIS RALENTSOE MOLOI Applicant and MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL
More information22 Use of force in effecting arrest
22 Use of force in effecting arrest Substitution of section 49 of Act 51 of 1977, as substituted by section 7 of Act 122 of 1998 1. The following section is hereby substituted for section 49 of the Criminal
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) J.o.. 13./2.ol.1- oari JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) \0 \ 5! 20i1- Case Number: 9326/2015 ( 1) REPORT ABLE: "ff!& I NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: '!@/NO (3) REVISED. J.o.. 13./2.ol.1- oari
More informationMEDIA STATEMENT CRIMINAL JUSTICE BRANCH
MEDIA STATEMENT CRIMINAL JUSTICE BRANCH April 28, 2016 16-09 No Charges Approved for Force Used in Arrest by Vancouver Police Victoria - The Criminal Justice Branch (CJB), Ministry of Justice, announced
More informationFIRST SECTION. Application no /10. against Russia lodged on 7 August 2010 STATEMENT OF FACTS
FIRST SECTION Application no. 48741/10 by Aleksandr Nikolayevich MILOVANOV against Russia lodged on 7 August 2010 STATEMENT OF FACTS THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Aleksandr Nikolayevich Milovanov, is a Russian
More informationHLC Report Repression of Political Opponents in Serbia 20 September 2000
HLC Report Repression of Political Opponents in Serbia 20 September 2000 The stepped-up violence by the Serbian and FR Yugoslavia authorities against political opponents following the calling of the presidential
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION: MTHATHA) CASE NO:966/2015. In the matter between: GCINIBANDLA NELSON GABAYI AND
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION: MTHATHA) CASE NO:966/2015 In the matter between: GCINIBANDLA NELSON GABAYI AND ANOTHER PLAINTIFFS AND MINISTER OF POLICE AND ANOTHER DEFENDANTS
More informationThe Complainant submits this complaint to the Court and states that there is probable cause to believe Defendant committed the following offense(s):
State of Minnesota County of Hennepin State of Minnesota, vs. Plaintiff, SAMUEL DAVID RONNEBERG DOB: 11/14/1990 17601 KETTERING TRAIL LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 Defendant. District Court 4th Judicial District
More informationFIRST SECTION. Application no /07 Gennadiy Nikolayevich KURKIN against Russia lodged on 15 October 2007 STATEMENT OF FACTS
FIRST SECTION Application no. 51098/07 Gennadiy Nikolayevich KURKIN against Russia lodged on 15 October 2007 Communicated on 9 July 2014 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant, Mr Gennadiy Nikolayevich Kurkin,
More informationTHE MINISTER OF SAFETY & SECURITY THE NATIONAL DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS APPEAL JUDGMENT
NOT REPORTABLE IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN CASE NO: CA 107/2016 Date Heard: 10 March 2017 Date Delivered: 16 March 2017 In the matter between: THE MINISTER OF SAFETY
More informationThis section covers coordination of services between agencies and the youth correctional system. STANDARDS
Child and Family Services PROGRAM STANDARDS MANUAL Section: 701 Effective: Oct 1/88 Revised: Sep 20/99 Page: 1 Subject: SERVICES TO YOUNG OFFENDERS This section covers coordination of services between
More informationTHE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) In the appeal of Appeal Case No: A110/15 Court a quo Case No 23186/07
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) In the appeal of Appeal Case No: A110/15 Court a quo Case No 23186/07 THE MINISTER OF POLICE SE MULLER FIRST APPELLANT SECOND APPELLANT
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG) Case No: 01753/11 MANTJIU MOTIANG JOSIAS MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG) Case No: 01753/11 (1) REPORTABLE: NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO (3) REVISED. 26 May 2015 E J Francis In the matter between:
More informationMINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES JUDGMENT. [1] In accordance to an agreement which was reached between the
Not Reportable IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION PORT ELIZABETH In the matter between: Case No: 3509/2012 Date Heard: 15/08/2016 Date Delivered: 1/09/2016 ANDILE SILATHA Plaintiff
More information2014 PA Super 234 OPINION BY STABILE, J.: FILED OCTOBER 14, The Commonwealth appeals from an order granting a motion to
2014 PA Super 234 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellant IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. NATHANIEL DAVIS Appellee No. 3549 EDA 2013 Appeal from the Order entered November 15, 2013 In the Court
More informationPOLICE AMENDMENT ACT 2003 BERMUDA 2003 : 7 POLICE AMENDMENT ACT 2003
BERMUDA 2003 : 7 POLICE AMENDMENT ACT 2003 [Date of Assent: 22 April 2003] [Operative Date: Notice in Gazette] WHEREAS it is expedient to amend the Police Act 1974 to establish procedures for the treatment
More informationINDICTABLE OFFENCES (PRELIMINARY ENQUIRY) ACT
INDICTABLE OFFENCES (PRELIMINARY ENQUIRY) ACT CHAPTER 12:01 48 of 1920 5 of 1923 21 of 1936 14 of 1939 25 of 1948 1 of 1955 10 of 1961 11 of 1961 29 of 1977 45 of 1979 Act 12 of 1917 Amended by *See Note
More informationIN THE NORTH WEST HIGH COURT MAFIKENG
IN THE NORTH WEST HIGH COURT MAFIKENG Case Number: 1661/2009 In the matter between: EMMANUEL TLHAGANYANE Plaintiff and MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY Defendant JUDGMENT LANDMAN J: Introduction [1] Emmanuel
More informationSMALL CLAIMS COURT ACT
LAWS OF KENYA SMALL CLAIMS COURT ACT NO. 2 OF 2016 Published by the National Council for Law Reporting with the Authority of the Attorney-General www.kenyalaw.org Small Claims Court No. 2 of 2016 Section
More informationSaid acts constituting the offense of Murder in the Second Degree in violation of MN Statute: (1) Maximum Sentence: 40 years.
STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY Page: 1 of 9 DISTRICT COURT SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT FILE NO.: PROSECUTOR FILE NO.: 2140615 State of Minnesota, Plaintiff, v. Joseph James Derks (DOB: 02/08/1994)
More informationPART 6: RESOLVING ISSUES AND PRESERVING RIGHTS
PART 6: RESOLVING ISSUES AND PRESERVING RIGHTS What this Part is about: This Part is designed to resolve issues and questions arising in the course of a Court action. It includes rules describing how applications
More information[Cite as Taylor v. Cuyahoga Hills Juvenile Corrections Facility, 2004-Ohio-3822.]
[Cite as Taylor v. Cuyahoga Hills Juvenile Corrections Facility, 2004-Ohio-3822.] IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO GEORGE R. TAYLOR, III, et al. : Plaintiffs : CASE NO. 2002-10283 Magistrate Steven A. Larson
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO: 16783/2011 (1) REPORTABLE: YES / NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO (3) REVISED... DATE...
More informationThe Criminal Justice System: From Charges to Sentencing
The Criminal Justice System: From Charges to Sentencing The Key Principles The aim the system is to protect and to regulate society, to punish offenders and to offer rehabilitation; The Government, through
More informationThe Complainant submits this complaint to the Court and states that there is probable cause to believe Defendant committed the following offense(s):
State of Minnesota County of Hennepin State of Minnesota, vs. Plaintiff, DONNA MAE BASTYR DOB: 05/01/1972 8110 12 AVE S #207 BLOOMINGTON, MN 55425 Defendant. District Court 4th Judicial District Prosecutor
More informationDecision adopted by the Committee under article 22 of the Convention, concerning communication No. 685/2015*, ** Judith Pieters)
United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment CAT/C/62/D/685/2015 Distr.: General 9 January 2018 Original: English Committee against Torture Decision
More informationREPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG)
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH
More informationTHE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (CRIMINAL) THE QUEEN AND SHAM SANGANOO
. THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (CRIMINAL) SAINT LUCIA CRIMINAL CASES NOS. SLUCRD 2007/0653, 0669 & 0670 BETWEEN: THE QUEEN AND SHAM SANGANOO Claimant Defendant Appearances:
More informationDocument references: Prior decisions - Special Rapporteur s rule 91 decision, dated 28 December 1992 (not issued in document form)
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE Kulomin v. Hungary Communication No. 521/1992 16 March 1994 CCPR/C/50/D/521/1992 * ADMISSIBILITY Submitted by: Vladimir Kulomin Alleged victim: The author State party: Hungary Date
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Case no: 339/09 MEC FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY Appellant (EASTERN CAPE PROVINCE) and TEMBA MTOKWANA Respondent Neutral citation: 2010) CORAM: MEC v Mtokwana
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH WEST DIVISION, MAHIKENG) ADRIAAN ALBERTUS STOLTZ
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH WEST DIVISION, MAHIKENG) CASE NO.: M320/15 In the matter between: ADRIAAN ALBERTUS STOLTZ APPLICANT And THE MINISTER: SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE N.O THE PROVINCIAL COMMISSIONER
More informationLeicestershire Constabulary Counter Allegations Procedure
Leicestershire Constabulary Counter Allegations Procedure This procedure supports the following policy: Counter Allegations Policy Procedure Owner: Department Responsible: Chief Officer Approval: Protective
More informationThe Complainant submits this complaint to the Court and states that there is probable cause to believe Defendant committed the following offense(s):
State of Minnesota County of Hennepin State of Minnesota, vs. Plaintiff, HOWARD WILLIAM AMOS DOB: 07/06/1980 1212 S 9TH ST Minneapolis, MN 55404 Defendant. District Court 4th Judicial District Prosecutor
More informationJUDGMENT DELIVERED ON 25 MAY 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN) Case No: 9332/2007 In the matter between: JUAN REYNOL MALGAS Plaintiff and THE MINISTER OF SAFETY & SECURITY Defendant JUDGMENT DELIVERED
More informationIN THE KWAZULU-NATAL HIGH COURT, PIETERMARITZBURG J U D G M E N T
REPORTABLE IN THE KWAZULU-NATAL HIGH COURT, PIETERMARITZBURG REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA Case No. 8774/09 In the matter between: THULANI SIFISO MAZIBUKO AMBROSE SIMPHIWE CEBEKHULU FIRST APPELLANT SECOND APPELLANT
More informationDescribe the powers of the police to arrest a person on the street [18]
Police Powers [2]: Arrest By the end of this unit you will be able to [AO1]: Explain when the police can arrest an individual with a warrant. Explain when the police can arrest an individual without a
More informationREUBEN ITUMELENG TODI MEC FOR THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT
IN THE NORTH WEST HIGH COURT, MAFIKENG CASE NO: 751/2005 In the matter between:- REUBEN ITUMELENG TODI Plaintiff and MEC FOR THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT First Defendant OF NORTH WEST RESPONSIBLE FOR HEALTH
More informationLaw 12 Substantive Assignments Reading Booklet
Law 12 Substantive Assignments Reading Booklet Reading # 1: Police and the Law Training and Qualifications Police officers have to go through both physical and academic training to become members of the
More informationCHRISTIAN SIKHOLELO TYATYA THE MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE PORT ELIZABETH) CASE NO.: 1850/2010 In the matter between: CHRISTIAN SIKHOLELO TYATYA Plaintiff And THE MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES Defendant JUDGMENT
More informationJUDGMENT. [1] The applicant seeks an order directing the respondents to return a
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT: MTHATHA) CASE NO: 862/09 DELIVERED ON : 08/04/10 In the matter between: EUNICE FEZIWE MBANGI Applicant And THE MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (Northern Cape Division, Kimberley)
Reportable: Circulate to Judges: Circulate to Regional Magistrates: Circulate to Magistrates: YES / NO YES / NO YES / NO YES / NO IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (Northern Cape Division, Kimberley) Saakno
More informationIndexed as: R. v. Proulx. Between Her Majesty The Queen, Applicant, and Guy A. Proulx, Respondent. [1988] O.J. No Action No.
Page 1 Indexed as: R. v. Proulx Between Her Majesty The Queen, Applicant, and Guy A. Proulx, Respondent [1988] O.J. No. 890 Action No. 1650/87 Ontario District Court - Algoma District Sault Ste. Marie,
More information2) Smuggling as defined in section 182 (1) of the Customs and Excise Act [Chapter 23:02]
1 THE STATE versus FISHER MATURA HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE MOYO J BULAWAYO 10 OCTOBER 2016 AND 9 MAY 2017 Criminal Trial W Mabhaudhi for the state A Rubaya for the accused MOYO J: The accused in this matter
More informationThe Complainant submits this complaint to the Court and states that there is probable cause to believe Defendant committed the following offense(s):
State of Minnesota County of Hennepin State of Minnesota, Plaintiff, vs. EMMANUEL DESHAWN ARANDA DOB: 08/23/1994 District Court 4th Judicial District Prosecutor File No. CR-2015-4736 Court File No. 27-CR-15-30544
More informationSTANDING ORDER (GENERAL) 349 MEDICAL TREATMENT AND HOSPITALIZATION OF A PERSON IN CUSTODY
STANDING ORDER (GENERAL) 349 MEDICAL TREATMENT AND HOSPITALIZATION OF A PERSON IN CUSTODY 1. Background It is the responsibility of the Service to ensure that a person in custody receives medical treatment
More informationFIRST SECTION. CASE OF ŠEBALJ v. CROATIA. (Application no. 4429/09) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG. 28 June 2011
FIRST SECTION CASE OF ŠEBALJ v. CROATIA (Application no. 4429/09) JUDGMENT STRASBOURG 28 June 2011 This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 2 of the Convention. It may
More informationThe Complainant submits this complaint to the Court and states that there is probable cause to believe Defendant committed the following offense(s):
State of Minnesota County of Hennepin State of Minnesota, vs. Plaintiff, CLINTON ANGWENYI OMUYA DOB: 10/31/1992 10729 CAVELL RD BLOOMINGTON, MN 55420 Defendant. District Court 4th Judicial District Prosecutor
More informationPolice Powers [2]: Arrest
Police Powers [2]: Arrest By the end of this unit you will be able to [AO1]: Describe when the police can arrest an individual with a warrant under s.24 of PACE (as amended) Describe the manner in which
More informationAMNESTY INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC STATEMENT
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC STATEMENT 28 JULY 2017 AI Index: EUR 25/6845/2017 Greece: Authorities must investigate allegations of excessive use of force and ill-treatment of asylumseekers in Lesvos Amnesty
More informationISSUES FOR DISCUSSION
BAIL HEARINGS ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Saskatoon Criminal Defence Lawyers Association December 1, 1998 Fall Seminar, 1998: Bail Hearings and Sentencing Also available to members at the SCDLA Web site: http://www.lexicongraphics.com/scdla.htm
More informationGuidance for Children s Social care Staff around the use of Police Protection
Guidance for Children s Social care Staff around the use of Police Protection This Guidance has been issued in response to concerns raised at the Inspection of Safeguarding and Looked After Children Services
More informationPKW Wijesinghe No. 120/A, Anura Publications, Kudugala Road, Wattaegama, Kandy. Petitioner. SC/Spl. 19/2007
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an application under in terms of Article 126 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.
More informationLevels of Police in Canada
Chapter 8 Levels of Police in Canada The Federal police force of Canada is the Royal Canadian Mounted Police which was formed in 1873 as the Northwest Mounted Police. The RCMP serves as provincial police
More informationINDIA Harjit Singh: In continuing pursuit of justice
INDIA Harjit Singh: In continuing pursuit of justice Amnesty International continues to be concerned for the safety of Harjit Singh, an employee of the Punjab State Electricity Board, who was arrested
More informationMALAWI. EMPLOYMENT ACT 2000 No. 6 of 2000
MALAWI EMPLOYMENT ACT 2000 No. 6 of 2000 PART II--FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES 4. (1) No person shall be required to perform forced labour. (2) Any person who exacts or imposes forced labour or causes or permits
More informationCHAPTER 17. Lunatics. Part A GENERAL. (b) Lunatics for whose detention in an asylum a reception order has been passed.
Ch. 17 Part A] CHAPTER 17 Lunatics Part A GENERAL 1. Classification Lunatics may be classed as follows: (a) Criminal lunatics. (b) Lunatics for whose detention in an asylum a reception order has been passed.
More informationFACT SHEET. Juveniles (children aged 16 or under):
FACT SHEET Introduction Arrest and Bail It is important for our clients to have an appreciation of their rights when it comes to such things as being arrested or being granted bail. However, in the event
More informationArrest and Interrogation
Arrest and Interrogation CHAPTER CONTENTS Introduction 2 Police Powers 2 Questioning of Suspects by Police 2 Answering Police Questions 4 Declining to Speak to Police 5 Detention for Police Questioning
More informationNETHERLANDS ANTILLES Comments by Amnesty International on the Second Periodic Report submitted to the United Nations Committee against Torture
NETHERLANDS ANTILLES Comments by Amnesty International on the Second Periodic Report submitted to the United Nations Committee against Torture In April 1995 the United Nations (UN) Committee against Torture
More informationL A W Y E R S ' C O U N C I L
(D.2) The Burma Lawyers' Council's Call for Justice for the Burmese Military Junta's Violent Crackdown of the Peaceful Civilian and Monk Demonstrations THE BURMA LAWYERS' COUNCIL'S CALL FOR JUSTICE ON
More informationDomestic. Violence. In the State of Florida. Beware. Know Your Rights Get a Lawyer. Ruth Ann Hepler, Esq. & Michael P. Sullivan, Esq.
Domestic Violence In the State of Florida Beware Know Your Rights Get a Lawyer Ruth Ann Hepler, Esq. & Michael P. Sullivan, Esq. Introduction You ve been charged with domestic battery. The judge is threatening
More informationTHE GAZETTE OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA
THE GAZETTE OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA Part II of May 27, 16 SUPPLEMENT (Issued on 27. 0. 16) OFFICE ON MISSING PERSONS (ESTABLISHMENT, ADMINISTRATION AND DISCHARGE OF FUNCTIONS)
More informationIMPLEMENTATION OF THE ROME STATUTE OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT ACT 27 OF ] (English text signed by the President)
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ROME STATUTE OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT ACT 27 OF 2002 [ASSENTED TO 12 JULY 2002] [DATE OF COMMENCEMENT: 16 AUGUST 2002] ACT (English text signed by the President) Regulations
More informationChapter 8 International legal standards for the protection of persons deprived of their liberty
in cooperation with the Chapter 8 International legal standards for the protection of persons deprived of their liberty Facilitator s Guide Learning objectives I To familiarize the participants with some
More informationEXPLAINING THE COURTS AN INFORMATION BOOKLET
EXPLAINING THE COURTS AN INFORMATION BOOKLET AT SOME STAGE IN OUR LIVES, EVERY ONE OF US IS LIKELY TO HAVE TO GO TO COURT FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER. WE MIGHT BE ASKED TO SIT ON A JURY OR TO GIVE EVIDENCE
More informationOpinions adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention at its seventy-eighth session, April 2017
Advance Edited Version Distr.: General 6 July 2017 A/HRC/WGAD/2017/32 Original: English Human Rights Council Working Group on Arbitrary Detention Opinions adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
More informationIN THE MATTER OF THE POLICE ACT, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 367 AND IN THE MATTER OF CONSTABLE NOTICE OF DISCIPLINE AUTHORITY S DECISION. TO: Constable Member
IN THE MATTER OF THE POLICE ACT, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 367 AND IN THE MATTER OF CONSTABLE NOTICE OF DISCIPLINE AUTHORITY S DECISION TO: Constable Member AND TO: Mr. Complainant AND TO: Sergeant Chris Spargo
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs on April 26, 2011
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs on April 26, 2011 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. MARK EDWARD COFFEY Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Washington County No.
More informationDelivered on: 31/05/13 NOT REPORTABLE SANDISO THIRDMAN MATU
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE HIGH COURT: MTHATHA CASE NO: 2408/10 Heard on: 27/05/13 Delivered on: 31/05/13 NOT REPORTABLE In the matter between: SANDISO THIRDMAN MATU Plaintiff and MINISTER
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF GRENADA AND THE WEST INDIES ASSOCIATED STATES HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Clinton Belfon AND. [1] CPL #48 Alex Fletcher
SUIT NO. GDAHCV2007/0439 BETWEEN: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GRENADA AND THE WEST INDIES ASSOCIATED STATES HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Clinton Belfon Claimant AND [1] CPL #48 Alex Fletcher [2] PC # 295 Quintana
More informationSTANDING ORDER (GENERAL) 307 PROCESSES AND REGISTER [SAPS 264]
STANDING ORDER (GENERAL) 307 PROCESSES AND REGISTER [SAPS 264] 1. Background Every member is, by virtue of section 13 of the South African Police Service Act, 1995 (Act No 68 of 1995) authorised to serve
More informationRECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF EKHURHULENI NORTH HELD AT KEMPTON PARK CASE NO: D803/16 DATE: 17-06-02 THE STATE versus PAUL O SULLIVAN Accused 1 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESIDING OFFICER: MR
More informationIN THE KWAZULU-NATAL HIGH COURT, PIETERMARITZBURG REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA THE MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY
IN THE KWAZULU-NATAL HIGH COURT, PIETERMARITZBURG REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA AR238/08 THE MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY First Appellant THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT Second Appellant
More informationThe Complainant submits this complaint to the Court and states that there is probable cause to believe Defendant committed the following offense(s):
State of Minnesota County of Hennepin State of Minnesota, vs. Plaintiff, BENJAMIN LOVE DOB: 11/27/1972 5649 34TH AVE S #2 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55417 Defendant. District Court 4th Judicial District Prosecutor
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BEFORE THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE K. N. KESHAVANARAYANA. CRIMINAL APPEAL No.882/2005 (C)
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 13 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE K. N. KESHAVANARAYANA BETWEEN: CRIMINAL APPEAL No.882/2005 (C) Amjad, S/o Sabjan,
More informationINFORMATION DOCUMENT ON HOW TO DEAL WITH UNLAWFUL OCCUPATION OF LAND
INFORMATION DOCUMENT ON HOW TO DEAL WITH UNLAWFUL OCCUPATION OF LAND 1. INTRODUCTION For purposes of this document, a clear distinction must be made between unlawful access to property and squatting in
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT KANSAS CITY COMPLAINT
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT KANSAS CITY POLICE NO. : 17-105251 PROSECUTOR NO. : 095442954 STATE OF MISSOURI, ) PLAINTIFF, ) vs. ) HOWARD TYRONE NEELY ) 3309 E 51st Street, ) Kansas
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PETER RAJKUMAR
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO HCA: No.S-1452 of 2003 HCA: 2544 of 2003 (POS) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN CURTIS GABRIEL Plaintiff AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Defendant BEFORE THE HONOURABLE
More informationTHE MINISTER OF POLICE JUDGMENT. [1] In this action the seven plaintiffs have sued the defendant for their arrest and
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE LOCAL
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Between: And: Varner v. Vancouver (City), 2009 BCSC 333 Gary Varner Date: 20090226 Docket: S032834 Registry: Vancouver Plaintiff John Doe and Richard
More informationSTANDING ORDER (GENERAL) 252 THE POCKET BOOK (SAPS 206)
STANDING ORDER (GENERAL) 252 THE POCKET BOOK (SAPS 206) 1. Background A pocket book (SAPS 206) must be used as a personal duty record and as an activity or task record to show all police work performed
More information