S v Manye and Another (CA&R 05/07) [2007] ZANCHC 39 (1 June 2007)

S v Manye and Another (CA&R 05/07) [2007] ZANCHC 39 (1 June 2007)

The court held that the first appellant, as an employee of the South African Revenue Service, had a general duty to act honourably and honestly in all matters affecting his employer's interests. The evidence overwhelmingly indicated that both appellants solicited and received a corrupt payment from the complainant, promising to prevent an audit of his tax returns. The statutory provisions of the Corruption Act were intended to be interpreted widely, and the first appellant's conduct fell squarely within its ambit. The second appellant, even if not directly subject to the statutory duty, was at least an accomplice, having actively facilitated the corrupt transaction. The trial court's...

Citation
[2007] ZANCHC 39
Parties
Appellant: Marshall Amos Manye; Appellant: Patrick Matlakale; Respondent: The State
Court
Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 June 2007
Case Number
CA&R 05/07
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentences confirmed.
Judges
Lacock, Williams
Legal Topics
Corruption, Statutory Interpretation, Public Officials Liability
Criminal Law Corruption Statutory Interpretation Public Officials Liability

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

Marshall Amos Manye

Appellant

Patrick Matlakale

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants' conduct constituted an offence under section 1(1)(b)(i) of the Corruption Act 94 of 1992.
  2. 2 Whether the appellants fell within the category of persons subject to the statutory duty or authority contemplated by the Act.
  3. 3 Whether the trial court correctly rejected the appellants' version as not reasonably possibly true.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the first appellant, as an employee of the South African Revenue Service, had a general duty to act honourably and honestly in all matters affecting his employer's interests. The evidence overwhelmingly indicated that both appellants solicited and received a corrupt payment from the complainant, promising to prevent an audit of his tax returns. The statutory provisions of the Corruption Act were intended to be interpreted widely, and the first appellant's conduct fell squarely within its ambit. The second appellant, even if not directly subject to the statutory duty, was at least an accomplice, having actively facilitated the corrupt transaction. The trial court's...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentences confirmed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.