Lawyer Paul-Michael Keichel of Cullinan and Associates, the firm representing Neil Liddel’s case, has welcomed the scheduled date of 4 November 2024 but adds that this does not rule out a settlement in the meantime.  

Those opposing Liddel’s appeal were the National Prosecuting Authority and the former ministers of Justice and Correctional Services, Ronald Lamola, and the Minister of Police, Bheki Cele, no longer hold those positions. This, and the fact that the Cannabis for Private Purposes Act of 2024 has been signed off by the President (although not yet enacted into law), gives Liddel’s team some legal “wriggle” room to negotiate an outcome that settles Liddel's case - and the legality of private cannabis clubs PCC’s) once and for all.

Keichel told Cannabiz Africa on Thursday, 26 September 2024 that “One hopes that the set-down (date) provides some impetus to further talk settlement”. He said that his team was intent on pursuing all legal avenues to resolve the case.  “In the absence of this being settled, the matter must be determined by the Supreme Court of Appeal and, possibly, by the Constitutional Court after that”.

Liddel has been facing charges under the Drugs Act after the THC’s grow facility in Ottery, Cape Town was raided by police in October, 2021.  Despite his protestations that THC was a legally constituted PCC, backed up with all the required legal paperwork, he and an employee, Ben van Houten, were arrested and charged with dealing in cannabis.

The matter, which became a benchmark case for the legality of PCC’s as well as a personal prosecution against Liddel, came before Judge Hayley Slingers in the Western Cape High Court on 4 November 2022. She reserved judgement and granted THC leave to appeal as a different court may have come to a different decision:

“I grant leave to appeal against the order dismissing the alternative relief in the judgement delivered on 29 August 2022 is granted to the Supreme Court of Appeal and costs of the application will be costs in the appeal.”

Earlier this year Judge Slingers had dismissed the THC application.

Judge Slingers wrote that “After considering the application for leave to appeal as well as argument by counsel, I am of the view there are reasonable prospects of success than an appeal court could find that the court erred in its reading of paragraphs 85 to 87 of the Prince 3 judgement and could find that a Grow Club Model gives effect to the right of an adult to possess and cultivate cannabis in private for his/her use”.

Judge Slinger wrote: “Furthermore there are reasonable prospects of success that an appeal court could find that the court erred by failing to properly apply the justification enquiry when considering the limitations of the constitutional rights to equality, bodily and psychological integrity, freedom of trade and profession and human dignity.

“Whether or not the Grow Club Model would result in condoning dealing in cannabis or would give effect to the right of an adult, via agency, to possess and/or cultivate cannabis for personal use in private is a question of law of importance, which in my opinion, should be considered by the SCA".

Judge Slingers said the original THC case, in which Liddell and van Houten were arrested and charged with possessing 2,5 kg of cannabis and cultivating 344 plants, would be put on hold for the time being. “These criminal proceedings have been stayed pending the finalization of this application. The outcome of this application will impact on how and when those proceedings are finalized”.

#