S v Kanoge (39 of 2012) [2012] NAHC 275 (12 October 2012)

# S v Kanoge (39 of 2012) [2012] NAHC 275 (12 October 2012) [ __](https://api.whatsapp.com/send?text=https://namiblii.org/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/275/eng@2012-10-12) [ __](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=https://namiblii.org/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/275/eng@2012-10-12) [ __](https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https://namiblii.org/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/275/eng@2012-10-12) [ __](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https://namiblii.org/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/275/eng@2012-10-12) [ __](mailto:?subject=Take a look at this document from NamibLII: S v Kanoge \(39 of 2012\) \[2012\] …&body=https://namiblii.org/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/275/eng@2012-10-12) [ Download RTF (606.3 KB) ](/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/275/eng@2012-10-12/source) Toggle dropdown * [Download PDF](/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/275/eng@2012-10-12/source.pdf) Report a problem __ * Share * [ Download RTF (606.3 KB) ](/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/275/eng@2012-10-12/source) * [Download PDF](/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/275/eng@2012-10-12/source.pdf) * * * * * Report a problem __ ##### S v Kanoge (39 of 2012) [2012] NAHC 275 (12 October 2012) Copy citation * __Document detail * __Related documents * __Citations 1 / - Citation S v Kanoge (39 of 2012) [2012] NAHC 275 (12 October 2012) Copy Media Neutral Citation [2012] NAHC 275 Copy Court [High Court](/judgments/NAHC/) Case number 39 of 2012 Judges [Parker AJ](/judgments/all/?judges=Parker%20AJ), [Miller AJ](/judgments/all/?judges=Miller%20AJ) Judgment date 12 October 2012 Language English Other documents [Download PDF](/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2012/275/eng@2012-10-12/attachment/s-v-kanoge-2012-nahc-275-12-october-2012.pdf) (247.3 KB) * * * Skip to document content **R REPORTABLE EPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA** **HIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA MAIN DIVISION, WINDHOEK** **JUDGMENT** Case no: CA 39/2012 In the matter between: #### **PAUL KANGA KANOGE APPELLANT** and **THE STATE RESPONDENT** **Neutral citation:**_Kanoge v State_(CA 39/2012) [[2012] NAHCMD 45](/akn/na/judgment/nahcmd/2012/45) (12 October 2012) **Coram:** MILLER AJ and PARKER AJ **Heard** : **12 October 2012** **Delivered** : **12 October 2012** **Flynote:** Criminal procedure – Notice of appeal – Such notice should clearly set out grounds of appeal – This rule of practice is not to be ignored without good cause. **Summary:** Criminal procedure – Notice of appeal – Such notice should clearly set out grounds of appeal – Such grounds are required to enable the State to apprise itself as to what case to meet and for the court to properly adjudicate the appeal – It is also required for the proper administration of criminal justice – There is no good reason why the rule should not apply to legal practitioners and lay appellants, too. **ORDER** The appeal against conviction is dismissed. **JUDGMENT** PARKER AJ (MILLER AJ concurring): [1] The appellant represents himself. The State is represented by Mr Kumalo who filed heads of argument and he stand by it. [2] The appellant appeared in the Windhoek Regional Court on one count of theft of a motor vehicle, read with the Motor Vehicle Theft [Act 12 of 1999](/akn/na/act/1999/12). He pleaded not guilty to the charge. He was tried and convicted and accordingly sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment. The appellant appeals against conviction only; and in his notice of appeal, the appellant raises six grounds of appeal. [3] I have given great thought to what he says are the grounds; and having done so, I am firmly of the opinion that, upon the authority of _S v Gey van Pittius and Another_ 1990 NR 35, there are no proper grounds before the court. They are all conclusions drawn by the appellant. In _S v Gey van Pittius_ , Strydom AJP (as he then was) at 36H 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 t bind the parties to those issues. (See further in this respect the judgment of my Brother Frank AJ in the matter of _S v Wellington_ (1990 NR 20) and the cases referred to therein.)’ [4] The principle enunciated in _S v Gey van Pittius_ has been followed in many cases by the court. For instance in _S v Kakololo_ 2004 NR 7 at 8F-9A, Maritz J (as he then was) developed the principle further and explained it as follows: ‘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 the disputes and disputes and determines the parameters within which the Court of Appeal will have to decide the case_ (Compare: _S v Maliwa and Others_ 1986 (3) SA 721 (W) at 727; _S v Nel_ 1962 (1) SA 134 (T) at 135A; and _R v Lepile_ 1953 (1) SA 225 (T) at 230H.) Consequently, _it also serves to focus the minds of the Judges of Appeal_ when reading the (sometimes lengthy) record of appeal, researching the law in point, considering argument and adjudicating the merits of the appeal.’ (My emphasis) [5] Upon the authorities, I find that there are no grounds of appeal which this court may consider in adjudicating the merits of this appeal. Granted, the appellant is a lay litigant and he represents himself; but these are not cogent reasons to persuade this court not to follow _S v Gey van Pittius_ and _S v Kakololo_. Indeed, there are no merits in the grounds that call on this court to adjudicate. I, therefore, hold that this appeal must fail. [6] In the result the appeal against conviction is dismissed. \----------------------------- C Parker Acting Judge \----------------------------- P J Miller Acting Judge APPEARANCES APPELLANT : In Person. RESPONDENT: P S Kumalo Of Office of the Prosecutor-General, Windhoek. #### __Related documents ▲ To the top >