S v Jack (562/15) [2015] ZAGPPHC 888 (3 November 2015)

S v Jack (562/15) [2015] ZAGPPHC 888 (3 November 2015)

The High Court held that the conviction of a child under 18 years old without a preliminary inquiry as required by section 5 of the Child Justice Act was unlawful. The magistrate acted correctly in referring the matter for review upon discovering the accused's true age, as the magistrate's court lacks the power to rescind its own criminal convictions. The delay in correcting the error would be manifestly prejudicial to the child, and the conviction must be set aside. The matter is remitted to the magistrate to be dealt with in accordance with the Child Justice Act and the law.

Citation
[2015] ZAGPPHC 888
Parties
Respondent: The State; Accused: Dineo Jack
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 November 2015
Case Number
562/15
Procedural Posture
Criminal Review / Special Review From Magistrate's Court
Outcome
Conviction set aside; matter remitted for proper procedure under the Child Justice Act.
Judges
Tuchten, M Ismail
Legal Topics
Child Justice Act, Preliminary Inquiry, Criminal Capacity, Magistrates Court Jurisdiction
Criminal Law Family and Children Child Justice Act Preliminary Inquiry Criminal Capacity Magistrates Court Jurisdiction

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Respondent

Dineo Jack

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Review / Special Review From Magistrate's Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction of a child under 18 years old without a preliminary inquiry is lawful.
  2. 2 Whether the magistrate's court acted correctly in referring the matter to the High Court upon discovering the accused's true age.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held that the conviction of a child under 18 years old without a preliminary inquiry as required by section 5 of the Child Justice Act was unlawful. The magistrate acted correctly in referring the matter for review upon discovering the accused's true age, as the magistrate's court lacks the power to rescind its own criminal convictions. The delay in correcting the error would be manifestly prejudicial to the child, and the conviction must be set aside. The matter is remitted to the magistrate to be dealt with in accordance with the Child Justice Act and the law.

Court Disposition

Conviction set aside; matter remitted for proper procedure under the Child Justice Act.

Orders

  • The conviction of Dineo Jack in the Oberholzer magistrate's court under case no. B1013/2015 is set aside.
  • The case is remitted to the magistrate, Oberholzer, to be dealt with in terms of section 5 of the Child Justice Act, 51 of 1997 and otherwise in accordance with law.