S v Mello and Another

dc.date.accessioned	2017-04-08T16:58:06Z
dc.date.available	2017-04-08T16:58:06Z
dc.date.created	2004-10-19	en
dc.identifier.citation	[1998] ZACC 7
dc.identifier.citation	1998 (3) SA 712 (CC)
dc.identifier.citation	1998 (7) BCLR 908 (CC)
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/2055
dc.title	S v Mello and Another	en
dc.title.alternative	CCT5/98	en
dc.identifier.casenumber	CCT5/98	en
dc.date.hearing
dc.contributor.judge	Mokgoro J
dc.date.judgment	28 May 1998
dc.link.judgment	http://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/2055/Full%20judgment%20%28167%20Kb%29-2070.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
dc.concourt.synopsis	Referral from the Transvaal High Court of the constitutional validity of presumption relating to possession of drugs in section 20 of the Drugs and DrugTrafficking Act 140 of 1992. Section 20 declared to be inconsistent with section 25(3)(c) of the interim Constitution in unanimous judgment by Mokgoro J.
dc.concourt.casehistory	Referral from the High Court regarding the constitutional validity of section 20 of Act 140 of 1992.

Files in this item

Full judgment (167 Kb)-2070.pdf ( 167.1Kb )

Summary of judgment-2071.pdf ( 17.96Kb )

1998-005-0001.pdf ( 52.35Kb )

1998-005-0002.pdf ( 42.25Kb )

1998-005-0003.pdf ( 40.25Kb )

1998-005-0004.pdf ( 633.6Kb )

1998-005-0005.pdf ( 4.836Mb )

1998-005-0006.pdf ( 424.8Kb )