Show simple item record

dc.date.accessioned 2017-04-08T17:13:36Z
dc.date.available 2017-04-08T17:13:36Z
dc.date.created 2010-11-15 en
dc.identifier.citation [2011] ZACC 19
dc.identifier.citation 2011 (5) SA 61 (CC)
dc.identifier.citation 2011 (9) BCLR 961 (CC)
dc.identifier.citation 2011 (2) SACR 301 (CC)
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/3631
dc.title Minister for Safety and Security v Van Der Merwe and Others en
dc.title.alternative CCT90/10 en
dc.identifier.casenumber CCT90/10 en
dc.date.hearing 3 March 2011
dc.contributor.judge Mogoeng J
dc.date.judgment 7 June 2011
dc.link.judgment http://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/3631/Full%20judgment%20Official%20version%207%20June%202011.pdf?sequence=19&isAllowed=y
dc.concourt.synopsis This decision concerned the validity and intelligibility of search and seizure warrants issued under section 21 of the Criminal Procedure Act. Upholding the decisions of the Supreme Court of Appeal and the Western Cape High Court, Cape Town, the Court held that a section 21 search warrant must specify the offence in issue. The High Court and the Supreme Court of Appeal found that the warrants in this case were invalid as they failed to specify the offences suspected of having been committed. This Court found that for a warrant issued in terms of section 21 to be intelligible, and accordingly valid, the warrant must stipulate the suspected offence. The failure to comply with this requirement led to the warrants being invalid. Judgment: Mogoeng J (unanimous)
dc.concourt.casehistory Application for leave to appeal against the SCA judgment: Minister of Safety and Security v Van der Merwe [2011] 1 All SA 260 (SCA); 2011 (1) SACR 211 (SCA). This case was first heard in the Western Cape High Court: Van der Merwe and Others v Additional Magistrate, Cape Town and Others 2010 (1) SACR 470 (C).


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search ConCourt Collections


Browse

My Account