DANIE VAN HEERDENS NOTICE OF APPEAL

DANIE VAN HEERDENS NOTICE OF APPEAL

Below is the list of things that Danie Van Heerden’s legal team are looking to appeal in the matter between MMASA and Danie Van Heerden.

 

  1. The board erred in respect of a finding of guilty on the basis of racism in that the charges which were laid against the accused related to unsportsmanlike conduct, verbal abuse and verbal obscenity and there was no separate charge of racism which is covered under a separate code of conduct breach.

 

  1. The board erred in further failing to take into account the submissions made in mitigation of any sentencing which were provided in a timeous fashion in accordance with the original stipulation.

 

  1. The board erred further in that it saw the post as one of a racial nature when there was clearly no intent to do so.

 

  1. The board erred further in the fact that it conducted a disciplinary hearing despite no complaint being submitted by the aggrieved party.

 

  1. The board erred further in a finding of a racial incident in that it failed to adduce any evidence indicating that the said post was had any racial intent aside from any personal submission made in the confines of pre-bout smack talk.

 

  1. The board erred in that it exceeded its powers by convicting of a charge for which the accused was never accused and was not afforded an opportunity to prepare and respond to.

 

  1. The board erred in that it deviated from the contents of its own constitution in regards to the procedures invoked.

 

  1. The board erred in finding that the accused was not permitted legal representation despite its constitution not setting forth grounds for an application for legal representation.

 

  1. The board erred in respect of the sentence by the determination that a suspension was a reasonable sentence in the circumstance despite same being excessively harsh and prohibitive.

 

  1. The board erred in permitting for a fine to be paid to a designated charity in that the board does not have the authority to make such a decision.

 

  1. The board erred further in its failure to take cognisance of the evidence produce in respect of the smack talk and reciprocal comments made by both parties in the confines of such pre-fight hype.

 

  1. The board erred in that it reached its decision based on subjective views instead of evidence and witness testimony.

 

  1. The board erred in its failure in the notice and charge sheet to properly establish and set out the procedures of the disciplinary hearing.

 

  1. The board erred in that its finding was made in the absence of adducing any evidence.

 

  1. The board erred in its failure to take into consideration the submissions of the Accused in his statement of defence.

 

Comments

comments

1 Comment