Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search

High Court of South Africa Western Cape, Cape Town

Currently serving on the bench:

Judge President N P Mabindla-Boqwana	Deputy Judge President P L Goliath	Judge N C Erasmus	Judge R Allie	Judge T C Ndita
Judge A Le Grange	Judge V C Saldanha	Judge C M J Fortuin	Judge M I Samela	Judge R C A Henney
Judge M J Dolamo	Judge J I Cloete	Judge B P Mantame	Judge K M Savage	Judge G Salie Da Silva
Judge L Nuku	Judge E D Wille	Judge T Papier	Judge M K Parker	Judge M Sher
Judge S Kusevitsky	Judge H M Slingers	Judge M Francis	Judge N Mangcu-Lockwood	Judge J D Lekhuleni
Judge D M Thulare	Judge C N Nziweni	Judge M Holderness	Judge M Pangarker	Judge N E Ralarala

Physical address

Physical: 35 Keerom Street, Cape Town, 8000 Post: Private Bag X 9020, Cape Town, 8001

Visit website

https://www.judiciary.org.za/index.php/courts/high-courts/western-cape-division-of-the-high-court/contact-details

1 judgment

Advanced search

Court registries

Eastern Circuit Local Division

Eastern Circuit Local Division, George

Eastern Circuit Local Division, Thembalethu

All years

All months

June

Filters

Sort by:

1 judgment

Citation	Judgment date
June 2008
S v De Vries and Others (67 of 2005) [2008] ZAWCHC 1 (11 June 2008) (Reasons) Reported Section 205 subpoenas improperly authorised — cellphone records excluded; searches after arrest admissible despite defective warrants. Criminal procedure – s 205 subpoenas – issuing magistrate’s duty to exercise judicial discretion – subpoenas issued as rubber‑stamp unlawful; resulting records inadmissible. Standing – accused may object to third‑party production of call records where records implicate accused’s privacy/interests. Arrest warrants – territorial jurisdiction – warrants issued outside proper magisterial district technically defective. Searches and seizures – ss 22 & 23 CPA – consent and urgency exceptions; searches admitted under s 22(a). Constitutional exclusion – s 35(5) – evidence unlawfully obtained need not be excluded where defect is technical, no mala fides, evidence is objective real evidence and admission would not render trial unfair.	11 June 2008

Citation

Judgment date

June 2008

S v De Vries and Others (67 of 2005) [2008] ZAWCHC 1 (11 June 2008) (Reasons)

Reported

Section 205 subpoenas improperly authorised — cellphone records excluded; searches after arrest admissible despite defective warrants.

Criminal procedure – s 205 subpoenas – issuing magistrate’s duty to exercise judicial discretion – subpoenas issued as rubber‑stamp unlawful; resulting records inadmissible. Standing – accused may object to third‑party production of call records where records implicate accused’s privacy/interests. Arrest warrants – territorial jurisdiction – warrants issued outside proper magisterial district technically defective. Searches and seizures – ss 22 & 23 CPA – consent and urgency exceptions; searches admitted under s 22(a). Constitutional exclusion – s 35(5) – evidence unlawfully obtained need not be excluded where defect is technical, no mala fides, evidence is objective real evidence and admission would not render trial unfair.

11 June 2008