Show simple item record

dc.date.accessioned 2017-04-08T16:58:50Z
dc.date.available 2017-04-08T16:58:50Z
dc.date.created 2004-09-29 en
dc.identifier.citation [2000] ZACC 5
dc.identifier.citation 2000 (3) SA 1 (CC)
dc.identifier.citation 2000 (5) BCLR 491 (CC)
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/2070
dc.title S v Manamela and Another (Director-General of Justice Intervening) en
dc.title.alternative CCT25/99 en
dc.identifier.casenumber CCT25/99 en
dc.date.hearing 4 November 1999
dc.contributor.judge Madala, Sachs, Yacoob JJ Majority judgment
dc.contributor.judge O'Regan J and Cameron AJ dissenting judgment
dc.date.judgment 14 April 2000
dc.link.judgment http://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/2070/Full%20judgment%20%28538%20Kb%29-1478.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
dc.concourt.synopsis Constitutionality of section 37 of General Law Amendment Act 62 of 1955 considered which makes it an offence to acquire stolen goods, otherwise than at a public sale, without having reasonable cause to believe that person disposing of the goods was authorised or entitled to do so. Reverse onus on accused. Held by unanimous Court to violate right to silence and presumption of innocence. Unanimous Court held violation of right to silence to be justified. Majority per Madala, Sachs and Yacoob JJ held violation of presumption of innocent to be unjustified under section 36 of Constitution. Minority per O'Regan J and Cameron AJ held violation of presumption of innocence to be justified.
dc.concourt.casehistory Adjudication of a referal for confirmation by the Constitutional Court of an order of the High Court in S v Manamela and Others 1999 (9) BCLR 994 (W) declaring the reverse onus provision in s 37(1) of the General Law Amendment Act 62 of 1995 unconstitutional.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search ConCourt Collections


Browse

My Account