S v Masiza [2009] ZAFSHC 70 (11 June 2009)

S v Masiza [2009] ZAFSHC 70 (11 June 2009)

The court found that the payment of the admission of guilt fine by the accused's employer finalized the matter before the accused was required to appear in court. Therefore, the subsequent conviction for failure to appear and the issuance of a warrant of arrest were improper. Both convictions and sentences were set aside, and the total amount paid was ordered to be refunded to the person who made the payment.

Citation
[2009] ZAFSHC 70
Parties
Applicant: The State; Respondent: Jonas Masiza
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 June 2009
Case Number
248/2009
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Review of Criminal Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Both convictions and sentences are set aside. The amount paid is to be refunded.
Judges
R Van Der Merwe, R Wright
Legal Topics
Public Transport Permit Offence, Failure to Appear, Review of Magistrate Decision, Refund of Paid Fine
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Public Transport Permit Offence Failure to Appear Review of Magistrate Decision Refund of Paid Fine

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Jonas Masiza

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Review of Criminal Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction and sentence for operating public transport without a valid permit should stand when the fine was already paid before the scheduled court appearance.
  2. 2 Whether the conviction and sentence for failure to appear in court were valid under the circumstances.
  3. 3 Whether the paid fines should be refunded to the person who paid them.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the payment of the admission of guilt fine by the accused's employer finalized the matter before the accused was required to appear in court. Therefore, the subsequent conviction for failure to appear and the issuance of a warrant of arrest were improper. Both convictions and sentences were set aside, and the total amount paid was ordered to be refunded to the person who made the payment.

Court Disposition

Both convictions and sentences are set aside. The amount paid is to be refunded.

Orders

  • The convictions and sentences are set aside.
  • The amount of R1,800.00 is to be refunded to Mr Edward Mofolo.