LIEUWE HOEKSTRA and JAN VAN RIJS and RONNY VAN RIJS and ENDRIK VAN RIJS v. HER MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE

Appellants: Gebbie; Anderson Strathern: Mr. Pen, McLaughlin; Anderson Strathern: Mr. Jahae, Gilday; Macafee: Dr. Sjöcrona, Nelson; Macafee

[3] We were informed at the bar that the appellants have applied for special leave to appeal to the Judicial Committee in terms of the Judicial Committee Devolution Issue Rules Order 1999. That application has not yet been determined. In the interlocutor of 28 January 2000 it was provided that the appeal should proceed on 6 March 2000 in respect of the remaining grounds of appeal. However, on the afternoon of Friday 3 March each of the appellants lodged a minute in the same terms. The minutes, as lodged, all contain the paragraph in the following terms:

"5. That in the circumstances and referring particularly to the fact that only one decision was issued by the court the minuter respectfully moves the bench currently comprising the court of appeal in this case to disqualify itself from hearing further submissions in this appeal on the basis that justice cannot be seen to have been done in the past or be seen to be done in the future to the minuter by this court".

"May it therefore please your Lordships to order that there be a diet and to assign a date for that diet namely 6 March 2000 for this minute to be the subject of submissions and debated fully and to do further or otherwise as in the circumstances shall seem just".

"When the solicitor for the complainers moved the sheriff to disqualify himself from considering the case I was of opinion that the sheriff misdirected himself as to the test to be applied."