Mpofu v Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development and Others (CCT 124/11) [2013] ZACC 15; 2013 (9) BCLR 1072 (CC); 2013 (2) SACR 407 (CC) (6 June 2013)

Mpofu v Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development and Others (CCT 124/11) [2013] ZACC 15; 2013 (9) BCLR 1072 (CC); 2013 (2) SACR 407 (CC) (6 June 2013)

The majority held that the High Court misdirected itself by failing to properly consider the applicant's status as a child at the time of the offences, as indicated by references in the sentencing judgment that he was 20 at the time of sentencing, implying he was under 18 when the offences were committed. This misdirection was serious given the constitutional demands regarding child offenders. The majority found that the principle of res judicata did not bar the application because previous dismissals were not on the merits and the constitutional issue warranted a flexible approach. The missing trial record and elapsed time did not override the need to address a potential constitutional...

Citation
[2013] ZACC 15
Parties
Applicant: Mandla Trust Mpofu; Respondent: Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development; Respondent: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions, South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg; Amicus Curiae: Centre for Child Law
Court
Constitutional Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 June 2013
Case Number
CCT 124/11
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Constitutional Court Following Dismissal of Prior Appeals and Condonation Applications.
Judges
Van der Westhuizen, Khampepe, Nkabinde, Skweyiya, Mogoeng, Moseneke, Cameron, Froneman, Jafta, Yacoob, Zondo
Legal Topics
Sentencing of Child Offenders, Section 28 Constitution, Leave to Appeal, Misdirection in Sentencing, Condonation, Fair Trial Rights
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Sentencing of Child Offenders Section 28 Constitution Leave to Appeal Misdirection in Sentencing Condonation Fair Trial Rights

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mandla Trust Mpofu

Applicant

Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development

Respondent

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Respondent

Director of Public Prosecutions, South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Respondent

Centre for Child Law

Amicus Curiae

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Constitutional Court Following Dismissal of Prior Appeals and Condonation Applications.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was a child at the time of the commission of the offences and whether this was properly considered in sentencing.
  2. 2 Whether the High Court misdirected itself by failing to take into account the applicant's childhood under section 28 of the Constitution.
  3. 3 Whether the principle of res judicata bars the present application for leave to appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that the High Court misdirected itself by failing to properly consider the applicant's status as a child at the time of the offences, as indicated by references in the sentencing judgment that he was 20 at the time of sentencing, implying he was under 18 when the offences were committed. This misdirection was serious given the constitutional demands regarding child offenders. The majority found that the principle of res judicata did not bar the application because previous dismissals were not on the merits and the constitutional issue warranted a flexible approach. The missing trial record and elapsed time did not override the need to address a potential constitutional...