SKWEYIYA J difficult to accept that the High Court judgment would have made no mention of Mr Mpofu’s minority if it had been revealed to it, especially given the centrality that minority occupies in the sentencing enquiry. [67] Because we do not know what the High Court found in respect of Mr Mpofu’s age, we are unable to determine whether it misdirected itself by failing to take account of it. Accordingly, the application lacks prospects of success because no misdirection can be established on these facts that could support an allegation that he did not have a fair trial. This militates strongly against it being in the interests of justice to grant leave to appeal. [68] That the record in the High Court could not be sourced is a further reason why interfering with the sentence would not be in the interests of justice. This Court would not be well-positioned to grant the relief sought, namely, to re-sentence Mr Mpofu. [69] Further, the interests of justice in granting Mr Mpofu’s application are weakened by his failure to act timeously in bringing it. It has taken 10 years for this matter to be brought to this Court. The passage of this significant length of time has surely impacted on the possibility of establishing reliable evidence as to the facts on which Mr Mpofu’s case rests. The interests of justice thus do not favour re-opening his case. 29