Malakalaka v S (AA05/2019) [2020] ZALMPPHC 19 (6 May 2020)

Malakalaka v S (AA05/2019) [2020] ZALMPPHC 19 (6 May 2020)

The appeal court found that the trial court correctly convicted the appellant of murder in terms of dolus eventualis, as the evidence showed that the appellant and his co-accused assaulted the deceased with various objects over a prolonged period, causing serious injuries that led to his death. The court rejected the defence of novus actus interveniens, finding no evidence of an intervening event after the assault. However, the court held that the jurisdictional facts for imposing a life sentence under section 51(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act were not established, as murder in terms of dolus eventualis ordinarily falls under section 51(2), which prescribes a minimum sentence of 15...

Citation
[2020] ZALMPPHC 19
Parties
Appellant: Matome Lazarus Malakalaka; Respondent: The State
Court
Limpopo High Court, Polokwane
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 May 2020
Case Number
AA05/2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence on Murder Charge
Outcome
Appeal against conviction on count 3 dismissed; appeal against sentence on count 3 upheld; sentence of life imprisonment set aside and substituted with 15 years imprisonment.
Judges
KGANYAGO, EM MAKGOBA, MV SEMENYA
Legal Topics
Common Purpose, Dolus Eventualis, Minimum Sentencing, Novus Actus Interveniens, Criminal Procedure Act, Criminal Law Amendment Act
Criminal Law Common Purpose Dolus Eventualis Minimum Sentencing Novus Actus Interveniens Criminal Procedure Act Criminal Law Amendment Act

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Matome Lazarus Malakalaka

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence on Murder Charge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant and his co-accused had the required intention to cause the death of the deceased.
  2. 2 Whether there was a novus actus interveniens after the assault by the appellant and his co-accused.
  3. 3 Whether jurisdictional facts for the imposition of a life sentence under section 51(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act were established.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal court found that the trial court correctly convicted the appellant of murder in terms of dolus eventualis, as the evidence showed that the appellant and his co-accused assaulted the deceased with various objects over a prolonged period, causing serious injuries that led to his death. The court rejected the defence of novus actus interveniens, finding no evidence of an intervening event after the assault. However, the court held that the jurisdictional facts for imposing a life sentence under section 51(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act were not established, as murder in terms of dolus eventualis ordinarily falls under section 51(2), which prescribes a minimum sentence of 15...

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction on count 3 dismissed; appeal against sentence on count 3 upheld; sentence of life imprisonment set aside and substituted with 15 years imprisonment.

Orders

  • The appeal against conviction on count 3 is dismissed.
  • The appeal against sentence on count 3 is upheld.