S v Jasat (154/96) [1997] ZASCA 4; ; [1997] 2 All SA 63 (A); (7 March 1997)

S v Jasat (154/96) [1997] ZASCA 4; ; [1997] 2 All SA 63 (A); (7 March 1997)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the appellant was correctly identified as the person present at the scene of the housebreaking and trespass. The evidence of impartial witnesses, corroborated by circumstantial facts such as the presence of the appellant's vehicle and his motive to recover confidential files, established his involvement beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction for housebreaking with intent to contravene section 1(1)(a) of the Trespass Act and such contravention was held to be a competent verdict on the original charge, and the appellant, as an experienced attorney represented by counsel, suffered no prejudice from the substitution of the lesser offence. The State...

Citation
[1997] ZASCA 4
Parties
Appellant: Farouk Jasat; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 March 1997
Case Number
154/96
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction reformulated to statutory trespass.
Judges
Nienaber, Scott, Plewman
Legal Topics
Trespass Act, Housebreaking, Competent Verdict, Identification Evidence, Prejudice to Accused
Criminal Law Trespass Act Housebreaking Competent Verdict Identification Evidence Prejudice to Accused

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 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Farouk Jasat

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was correctly identified as the perpetrator of the housebreaking and trespass.
  2. 2 Whether the conviction for housebreaking with intent to trespass and trespass was a competent verdict on the charge of housebreaking with intent to steal and theft.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant was prejudiced by being convicted of a lesser offence than charged without prior warning.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the appellant was correctly identified as the person present at the scene of the housebreaking and trespass. The evidence of impartial witnesses, corroborated by circumstantial facts such as the presence of the appellant's vehicle and his motive to recover confidential files, established his involvement beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction for housebreaking with intent to contravene section 1(1)(a) of the Trespass Act and such contravention was held to be a competent verdict on the original charge, and the appellant, as an experienced attorney represented by counsel, suffered no prejudice from the substitution of the lesser offence. The State...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction reformulated to statutory trespass.

Orders

  • The wording of the conviction is substituted to read: 'The accused is convicted of housebreaking with the intent of contravening section 1(1)(a) of the Trespass Act, 1959, and the contravention thereof.'
  • Otherwise, the appeal is dismissed.