S v Cossa (96/2015) [2015] ZAFSHC 115 (25 June 2015)
- Citation
- [2015] ZAFSHC 115
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
- Panel
- A. Williams, S. Naidoo
- Case number
- 96/2015
More details
- Court
- Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
- Panel
- A. Williams, S. Naidoo
- Case number
- 96/2015
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The magistrate's order declaring the accused unfit to possess a firearm was ultra vires, as section 103 of the Firearms Control Act, 60 of 2000 does not apply to the offence for which the accused was convicted. The accused was properly convicted and sentenced for contravening section 49(1)(a) of Act 13 of 2002, but the additional order regarding firearm competency was not authorized by law and must be set aside. The sentence of a fine of R1,000 or three months' imprisonment is confirmed as appropriate.
Court disposition
The sentence is amended to exclude the order declaring the accused unfit to possess a firearm. The accused is sentenced to a fine of R1,000 or three months' imprisonment.
Orders
- The accused is sentenced to a fine of R1,000 or three months' imprisonment.
- The order declaring the accused unfit to possess a firearm is set aside.
02
Material facts
Parties
The State
ApplicantRui Vincente Cossa
Respondent Counsel: Me SeatiAmounts and remedies
- Fine Imposed: ZAR 1,000
03
Procedural history
Posture
Review Application / Special Review Under Section 304(4) of Act 51 of 1977
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the magistrate's order declaring the accused unfit to possess a firearm was lawful.
- 02
Whether the provisions of section 103 of the Firearms Control Act, 60 of 2000 apply to the offence for which the accused was convicted.
- 03
Whether the sentence imposed by the magistrate was appropriate.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The State prosecuted the accused for contravening section 49(1)(a) of Act 13 of 2002, alleging he was an illegal foreigner. The accused pleaded guilty and was convicted and sentenced. The magistrate further declared the accused unfit to possess a firearm under section 103(2) of Act 60 of 2000.
- Respondent
- The accused, represented by Me Seati, confirmed the guilty plea and accepted the sentence. No specific argument was advanced regarding the firearm declaration.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Firearms Control Act 60 of 2000, section 103
Section 103 of the Firearms Control Act, 60 of 2000 does not apply to convictions under section 49(1)(a) of Act 13 of 2002, as the offence is not listed in Schedule 2 nor does it warrant an enquiry into firearm competency.
- 02
Firearms Control Act 60 of 2000, section 103(1)(a)-(o), 103(2)
A court may only declare a person unfit to possess a firearm if convicted of offences listed in Schedule 2 or where the statute expressly provides for such an enquiry.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The magistrate's order declaring the accused unfit to possess a firearm was ultra vires, as section 103 of the Firearms Control Act, 60 of 2000 does not apply to the offence for which the accused was convicted. The accused was properly convicted and sentenced for contravening section 49(1)(a) of Act 13 of 2002, but the additional order regarding firearm competency was not authorized by law and must be set aside. The sentence of a fine of R1,000 or three months' imprisonment is confirmed as appropriate.
Obiter and limits
- Clerks of the court should ensure that orders regarding firearm competency are only made where authorized by statute.
- Magistrates must carefully consider the applicability of statutory provisions before making ancillary orders.
Court disposition
The sentence is amended to exclude the order declaring the accused unfit to possess a firearm. The accused is sentenced to a fine of R1,000 or three months' imprisonment.
- The accused is sentenced to a fine of R1,000 or three months' imprisonment.
- The order declaring the accused unfit to possess a firearm is set aside.
Source and reliance status
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN
Review Number : 96/2015
In the review of:
THE
STATE
and
RUI VINCENTE COSSA
CORAM:
NAIDOO, J et WILLIAMS, AJ
JUDGMENT BY: WILLIAMS, AJ
DELIVERED ON: 25 JUNE 2015
[1] This is a special review under section 304(4) of Act 51 of 1977.
[2] The accused was charged with contravening section 49(1)(a) of Act 13 of 2002- Illegal Foreigner, in the magistrate’s court, Welkom. The accused was represented by Me Seati who confirmed the plea of guilty by the accused in terms of section 112(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act. After his written statement in terms of the Act had been read into the record, the learned magistrate found the accused guilty as charged.
[3] The accused was thereupon sentenced to a fine of R1 000,00 or three months’ imprisonment. In terms of section 103(2) of Act 60 of 2000, the accused was furthermore declared unfit to possess a firearm. In this regard the clerk of the court has also informed the registrar of the Firearms Registry Centre of the magistrate’s order declaring the accused unfit to possess a firearm.
[4] The provisions of section 103 of the Firearms Control Act, 60 of 2000 are, however, not applicable in this instance. Section 103(1)(a) – 103(1)(o) as well as section 103(2) with reference to schedule 2 does not warrant an enquiry into the competency of a person to possess a firearm. This part of the order is therefore ultra vires.
[5] I therefore propose that the following order be made:
The sentence of the court a quo is amended to read as follows:
1. The accused is sentenced to a fine of R1 000,00 or three months’ imprisonment.
_________
A. WILLIAMS, AJ
I agree:
______
S. NAIDOO, J
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.