Cloete and Others v S (A106/2019) [2019] ZAFSHC 247; 2020 (1) SACR 317 (FB) (19 December 2019)

Cloete and Others v S (A106/2019) [2019] ZAFSHC 247; 2020 (1) SACR 317 (FB) (19 December 2019)

The court found that the appellants were faced with an emergency situation where the survival of the cubs was at stake and statutory compliance was objectively impossible due to the cubs' age and health. The evidence established that permits could not be obtained because microchipping was required, but not feasible for newborn cubs. The defence of impossibility was accepted regarding the permit requirements. The court further held that the defence of necessity applied, as the appellants acted to protect the lives of the cubs, which outweighed the interest in strict statutory compliance. The emergency was ongoing and justified the appellants' actions. The failure to report births and...

Citation
[2019] ZAFSHC 247
Parties
Appellant: Thalita Susanna Cloete; Appellant: Francoais Stephanus Schutte; Appellant: Francoais Benjamin Schutte; Respondent: The State
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 December 2019
Case Number
A106/2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From Regional Court Welkom
Outcome
Appeal upheld; convictions and sentences set aside.
Judges
Mhlambi, Murray
Legal Topics
Necessity Defence, Impossibility Defence, Protected Species Permit, Failure to Report, Animal Welfare, Statutory Compliance
Criminal Law Environmental Law Necessity Defence Impossibility Defence Protected Species Permit Failure to Report Animal Welfare Statutory Compliance

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thalita Susanna Cloete

Appellant

Francoais Stephanus Schutte

Appellant

Francoais Benjamin Schutte

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From Regional Court Welkom

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants' failure to obtain permits for transporting and keeping protected species was justified by impossibility and necessity.
  2. 2 Whether the emergency situation regarding the cubs absolved the appellants from criminal liability.
  3. 3 Whether the appellants' failure to report births and deaths of cubs within five working days constituted a criminal offence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellants were faced with an emergency situation where the survival of the cubs was at stake and statutory compliance was objectively impossible due to the cubs' age and health. The evidence established that permits could not be obtained because microchipping was required, but not feasible for newborn cubs. The defence of impossibility was accepted regarding the permit requirements. The court further held that the defence of necessity applied, as the appellants acted to protect the lives of the cubs, which outweighed the interest in strict statutory compliance. The emergency was ongoing and justified the appellants' actions. The failure to report births and...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; convictions and sentences set aside.

Orders

  • The appeal against the convictions and sentences of the appellants succeeds.
  • The order of the court a quo is set aside with costs.