Rules, a convicted person who desires to appeal against a decision of the court must file a notice of appeal within 14 days after the date of magistrates’ conviction and the notice must clearly and specifically set out the grounds on which the appeal is based. [4] I have carefully considered what the appellant has put forth as notice of appeal. I have also taken into account the that pleadings Supreme Court’s counsel (and other papers) prepared by lay persons representing themselves should be construed generously and in the light most favourable to the lay person. See 2008 (12) Christian v Metropolitan Life Namibia Retirement Annuity Fund and Others NR 753 (SC). But in my view, the proposition should not be taken too far as to cover situations, like the present one, where a statutory provision has not been complied with. In the present case, the appellant has not satisfied the peremptory statutory requirement under rule 67(1) of the Rules which, according to Magistrates’ Courts the authorities, serve a very useful purpose. [5] In S v Gey van Pittius and Another 1990 NR 35 at 36H Strydom JP stated: of grounds of appeal as required by the Rules is to apprise all ‘The purpose interested parties as fully as possible of what is in issue and to bind the parties to those issues.’ And in S v Kakolo 2004 NR 7 at 8F-9A, Maritz J developed the principle further and explained thus: noting of an appeal constitutes the very foundation on which the case of the ‘The appellant must stand or fall (S v Khoza 1979 (4) SA 757 (N) at 758B). It serves to inform the trial magistrate in clear and specific terms which part of his or her judgment is being appealed against, what the grounds are on which the appeal is being brought and whether they relate to issues of law or fact, or both …. notice also serves to inform the respondent of the case it is required to meet ‘The and, regard being had to the record and the whether it should concede magistrate’s reasons, or oppose the appeal. Finally, it crystallizes and disputes and determines the parameters within which the Court of Appeal will have to decide the case.
Rules, a convicted person who desires to appeal against a decision of the magistrates’ court must file a notice of appeal within 14 days after the date of conviction and the notice must clearly and specifically set out the grounds on which the appeal is based. [4] I have carefully considered what the appellant has put forth as notice of appeal. I have also taken into account the Supreme Court’s counsel that pleadings (and other papers) prepared by lay persons representing themselves should be construed generously and in the light most favourable to the lay person. See Christian v Metropolitan Life Namibia Retirement Annuity Fund and Others 2008 (12) NR 753 (SC). But in my view, the proposition should not be taken too far as to cover situations, like the present one, where a statutory provision has not been complied with. In the present case, the appellant has not satisfied the peremptory statutory requirement under rule 67(1) of the Magistrates’ Courts Rules which, according to the authorities, serve a very useful purpose. [5] In S v Gey van Pittius and Another 1990 NR 35 at 36H Strydom JP stated: ‘The purpose of grounds of appeal as required by the Rules is to apprise all interested parties as fully as possible of what is in issue and to bind the parties to those issues.’ And in S v Kakolo 2004 NR 7 at 8F-9A, Maritz J developed the principle further and explained thus: ‘The noting of an appeal constitutes the very foundation on which the case of the appellant must stand or fall (S v Khoza 1979 (4) SA 757 (N) at 758B). It serves to inform the trial magistrate in clear and specific terms which part of his or her judgment is being appealed against, what the grounds are on which the appeal is being brought and whether they relate to issues of law or fact, or both …. ‘The notice also serves to inform the respondent of the case it is required to meet and, regard being had to the record and the magistrate’s reasons, whether it should concede or oppose the appeal. Finally, it crystallizes and disputes and determines the parameters within which the Court of Appeal will have to decide the case.
Idan%20v%20State%20(CA%2034-2014)%20[2014]%20NAHCMD%20217%20(14%20July%202014).docx