Show simple item record

dc.date.accessioned 2017-04-08T16:55:35Z
dc.date.available 2017-04-08T16:55:35Z
dc.date.created 2004-11-30 en
dc.identifier.citation [1996] ZACC 25
dc.identifier.citation 1996 (4) SA 187 (CC)
dc.identifier.citation 1996 (6) BCLR 788 (CC)
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/1984
dc.title Key v Attorney-General Cape Provincial Division and Another en
dc.title.alternative CCT21/94 en
dc.identifier.casenumber CCT21/94 en
dc.date.hearing 23 May 1995
dc.contributor.judge Kriegler J
dc.date.judgment 15 May 1996
dc.link.judgment https://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/1984/Full%20judgment%20Official%20version%2015%20May%201996.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
dc.concourt.synopsis Sections 6 and 7 of the Serious Economic Offences Act. (Search and seizure, Tollgate) Use of derivative evidence. Distinction between constitutionality and admissibility. S 25(3) of the Constitution. Maj: Kriegler J (unanimous).
dc.concourt.casehistory Adjudication of a referral to the Constitutional Court by the High Court regarding the constitutionality of ss 6 and 7 of Act 117 of 1991 ; Constitution declared not to be applicable.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search ConCourt Collections


Browse

My Account