• Tidak ada hasil yang ditemukan

IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2024

Membagikan "IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA"

Copied!
2
0
0

Teks penuh

(1)

IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

CASE NO: 27/99 In the matter between

J M TWALA Applicant

and

THE STATE Respondent

DIRECTIONS

The following directions have been given by the President of the Constitutional Court concerning an application made by the above named applicant to appeal against his

conviction and sentence in case no. CC 300/95, decided in the Witwatersrand Local Division of the High Court on 25 February 1998.

1. The application by the applicant will be treated as an application for leave to appeal to the Constitutional Court in terms of rule 18 for the purposes of determining the

following question:

“Whether the procedure for appeals to the Supreme Court of Appeal

prescribed by section 316 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1997, read with section 315(4) of that Act complies with the requirements of section 35(3)(o) of the Constitution.

2. The question will be dealt with as an abstract question of law, and no record need be prepared for such purpose.

3. The application is set down for hearing before the Constitutional Court at 10 a.m. on 16 November 1999.

4. Written argument on behalf of the applicant shall be lodged with the Registrar of the Constitutional Court by not later than 8 October 1999.

5. Written argument on behalf of the State shall be lodged with the Registrar of the Constitutional Court by not later than 22 October 1999.

(2)

6. In their written argument counsel are required to consider whether the decision of the Constitutional Court in S v Rens remains applicable to this question, bearing in mind the difference between the wording of section 35(3)(o) of the Constitution, and the wording of section 25(3)(h) of the interim Constitution, and the fact that there is no provision in the Constitution comparable with the provisions of section 102(11) of the interim Constitution.

7. Notice of these directions is to be given to the Minister of Justice, the National Director of Public Prosecutions, and the Human Rights Commission, who are entitled to make submissions to this Court in respect of the question referred to in paragraph 1 above. If any of them elects to make such representations, notice of an intention to do so should be given to the Registrar of the Constitutional Court by not later than 22 September 1999, indicating whether or not the party concerned wishes also to be represented at the hearing of the matter. Any representations made pursuant to such notice, shall be lodged with the Registrar by not later than 15 October 1999.

M S STANDER REGISTRAR

To: J M Twala (Prison Number: 98264761) Johannesburg Medium B Prison

and to The Attorney General

Witwatersrand Local Division Johannesburg

(Ref: CC 300/95)

Referensi

Dokumen terkait

These written submissions are structured as follows: 10.1 First, we address the requirements for leave to appeal; 10.2 Second, a brief background to the dispute is set out; 10.3

Moreover, the provision, in the Constitution itself, that the procedure of the Constitutional Court shall be as prescribed by a unanimous resolution of judges of the Constitutional

In this Court, Billiton concedes that Mr Khanyile's dismissal was unfair, but challenges the decision of the Labour Appeal Court on two grounds: first, that the CCMA arbitration award

AD PARAGRAPH 34:- Whilst I admit the provisions of the section in question, I deny the allegation that the Labour Appeal Court was dealing with a constitutional matter and I insist

LAC CASE NO : DA 16/2016 LABOUR COURT CASE NO : D 345/14 In the matter between : NATIONAL UNION OF METALWORKERS OF SOUTH AFRICA “NUMSA” obo KHANYILE, NGANEZI AND OTHERS APPLICANT

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA Case CCT 298/17 In the matter between: JOHANNES SEPTEMBER Applicant and THE STATE Respondent DIRECTIONS DATED 28 MARCH 2018 The Chief

2.2 Whether the appeal should succeed, and consequently :- 2.2.1 whether the Commissioner’s Award was a reasonable award; 2.2.2 whether the Labour Court was correct; 2.2.3 whether

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA Cases CCT 158/18 and CCT 179/18 Case CCT 158/18 In the matter between: COMPETITION COMMISSION OF SOUTH AFRICA Applicant and STANDARD BANK OF