Gwababa v S (1290/16) [2016] ZASCA 200 (7 December 2016)

Gwababa v S (1290/16) [2016] ZASCA 200 (7 December 2016)

The court found that exceptional circumstances exist, as a grave injustice may result if the applicant's application for special leave to appeal is not reconsidered, especially given that co-accused in similar circumstances were granted leave or had their applications referred for reconsideration. The trial court's application of the doctrine of common purpose and its rejection of the applicant's version regarding his awareness of the deceased being dragged were questioned. The court held that another court may reasonably reach a different conclusion regarding both the application of common purpose and the form of intent. Accordingly, the decision refusing special leave to appeal is...

Citation
[2016] ZASCA 200
Parties
Applicant: Lungisa Gwababa; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 December 2016
Case Number
1290/16
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Reconsideration of Refusal of Special Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for condonation granted; decision refusing special leave to appeal referred for reconsideration and possible variation.
Judges
MML Maya
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Superior Courts Act Section 17, Common Purpose, Dolus Eventualis, Condonation, Murder Conviction
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Superior Courts Act Section 17 Common Purpose Dolus Eventualis Condonation Murder Conviction

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lungisa Gwababa

Applicant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Reconsideration of Refusal of Special Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether exceptional circumstances exist to justify reconsideration and possible variation of the refusal of special leave to appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the doctrine of common purpose was properly applied by the trial court.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's version regarding his awareness of the deceased being dragged was properly rejected.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that exceptional circumstances exist, as a grave injustice may result if the applicant's application for special leave to appeal is not reconsidered, especially given that co-accused in similar circumstances were granted leave or had their applications referred for reconsideration. The trial court's application of the doctrine of common purpose and its rejection of the applicant's version regarding his awareness of the deceased being dragged were questioned. The court held that another court may reasonably reach a different conclusion regarding both the application of common purpose and the form of intent. Accordingly, the decision refusing special leave to appeal is...

Court Disposition

Application for condonation granted; decision refusing special leave to appeal referred for reconsideration and possible variation.

Orders

  • Condonation is granted to the applicant for the late filing of his application.
  • The decision of this court dated 25 August 2016 dismissing the applicant’s application for special leave to appeal against his conviction and sentence is referred to the court for reconsideration and, if necessary, variation, in terms of s 17(2)(f) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013.