S v Dlamini (1210/2000) [2000] ZAGPHC 3 (16 August 2000)

S v Dlamini (1210/2000) [2000] ZAGPHC 3 (16 August 2000)

The magistrate correctly found the accused guilty of failing to pay maintenance. However, the amount of arrears proved was R5750, not R9100 as charged. The conviction must be amended to reflect the correct amount, ensuring that the sentence, when imposed, is based on accurate facts. The review court exercises its power to correct the record before sentence is passed.

Citation
[2000] ZAGPHC 3
Parties
Applicant: The State; Respondent: Maswazi Dlamini
Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
16 August 2000
Case Number
1210/2000
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Special Review Before Sentence
Outcome
Conviction amended to reflect arrears of R5750 instead of R9100. Sentence not yet imposed.
Judges
N.P. Willis, G.M. Makhanya
Legal Topics
Maintenance Order, Failure to Pay Maintenance, Criminal Review

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Maswazi Dlamini

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Special Review Before Sentence

  1. 1 Whether the accused was correctly convicted for failing to pay maintenance under Section 11(1) of Act 23 of 1963.
  2. 2 Whether the amount of arrears was correctly determined for the conviction.

Ratio Decidendi

The magistrate correctly found the accused guilty of failing to pay maintenance. However, the amount of arrears proved was R5750, not R9100 as charged. The conviction must be amended to reflect the correct amount, ensuring that the sentence, when imposed, is based on accurate facts. The review court exercises its power to correct the record before sentence is passed.

Court Disposition

Conviction amended to reflect arrears of R5750 instead of R9100. Sentence not yet imposed.

Orders

  • The conviction is amended to read: The accused is found guilty of contravening Section 11(1) of Act 23 of 1963 but only to the extent of R5750 and not R9100 as charged.