Country
Court
Type of court
Seat of court
Windhoek
Court jurisdiction
Date of opinion
1996
Abstract
The applicant filed an application on review seeking an order that would set aside the acquittal of the respondent. This court then focused on the interpretation of the phrase ’irregularity in the proceedings’. The court referred to several precedents that had stated that a mistake in law was not per se an irregularity. The court also analysed the inherent powers possessed by it and how far such power extends to it intervening onto cases on review. The court then confirmed that its inherrent powers were to only be exercised in the most exceptional cases.
Language of document
English
Reference number
[1996] NASC 4
Charges
The first count alleged a contravention of section 28(1) (a) of Ordinance 4 of 1975 it being alleged that he hunted on State land. The second count alleged a contravention of section 27(1) of that Ordinance it being alleged that, on 1 February 1994 he had unlawfully hunted protected game, namely one LECHWE without a permit.
Transnational
No
Decision
The court held that the error that had occured in this case was an error of law per se and not an irregularity in the proceedings. The court also stated that, t applicant was to blame for providing the Judge in the High Court with the wrong advice regarding the amendment to the Ordinance. The court held that there was no basis for it to intervene on review where no irregularity had occured in this case. The court refused the application by the State.
Appealed
No
Penalty
None.