7See (A) at 161D-E. Although Kriegler and Kruger, Hiemstra, R v Mogale Suid-Afrikaanse 6 ed 895 describe such a report as because judgments and rulings Strafproses ‘superfluous’ – usually contain motivated reasons for decisions reached an instance such as the present, in – the reasons delivered fall well short of providing an adequate explanation for ex tempore the decision, provides a continuing for compliance with the dictates of the raison d’etre section. It may, of course, depending on what has preceded the report, be necessary to do no more than affirm the court’s already expressed reasons. 8Section 317 (5) 9Cf (A) at 273H-I. S v Tsawane and Another 10S (A) at 613C-D; (SCA) at para 31. v De Jager S v Wilmot 11Section 144(3)(a) of the Act. 12Shabalala ; (CC). and Others v Attorney-General of Transvaal [] []
7See R v Mogale (A) at 161D-E. Although Kriegler and Kruger, Hiemstra, Suid-Afrikaanse Strafproses 6 ed 895 describe such a report as ‘superfluous’ – because judgments and rulings usually contain motivated reasons for decisions reached – an instance such as the present, in the reasons delivered ex tempore fall well short of providing an adequate explanation for the decision, provides a continuing raison d’etre for compliance with the dictates of the section. It may, of course, depending on what has preceded the report, be necessary to do no more than affirm the court’s already expressed reasons. 8Section 317 (5) 9Cf S v Tsawane and Another (A) at 273H-I. 10S v De Jager (A) at 613C-D; S v Wilmot (SCA) at para 31. 11Section 144(3)(a) of the Act. 12Shabalala and Others v Attorney-General of Transvaal ; (CC). [] []
bezuidenhoud-v-director-of-public-prosecutions.docx