S v Moreki (77/2013) [2013] ZAFSHC 56 (1 April 2013)
- Citation
- [2013] ZAFSHC 56
- Status
- Order
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
- Panel
- P.U. Fischer, F. Jordaan
- Case number
- 77/2013
More details
- Court
- Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
- Panel
- P.U. Fischer, F. Jordaan
- Case number
- 77/2013
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The fine imposed on Molebogeng Moreki exceeded the statutory limit of R1 500.00 set by the Minister in terms of section 112(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act at the time of sentencing. The magistrate correctly conceded this error and referred the matter for special review. The conviction is confirmed, but the sentence is set aside and the record remitted to the magistrate for the imposition of an appropriate sentence in accordance with the statutory limit applicable at the time.
Court disposition
Conviction confirmed; sentence set aside and remitted for appropriate sentencing.
Orders
- The conviction is confirmed.
- The sentence is set aside and the record is remitted back to the Magistrate for the imposition of an appropriate sentence in accordance with the legislation imposed by the Minister in terms of Government Notice R289, Government Gazette 2393 of 14 February 2003.
02
Material facts
Parties
The State
ApplicantMolebogeng Moreki
RespondentAmounts and remedies
- Value of Damaged Property: ZAR 200
- Fine Imposed: ZAR 2,500
- Statutory Fine Limit at Time of Sentencing: ZAR 1,500
03
Procedural history
Posture
Review Application / Special Review Under Section 304(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the fine imposed exceeded the statutory limit under section 112(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act.
- 02
Whether the sentence should be set aside and remitted for proper sentencing.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The State did not oppose the review and acknowledged that the fine imposed exceeded the statutory limit applicable at the time of sentencing.
- Respondent
- The presiding magistrate conceded that the fine imposed was in excess of the statutory limit and requested the matter be referred for special review.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977
A magistrate may not impose a fine exceeding the statutory limit set by the Minister under section 112(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act.
- 02
Government Notice R289, Government Gazette 2393 of 14 February 2003
The statutory limit for fines under section 112(1)(a) was R1 500.00 at the time of the offence and sentencing, as determined by Government Notice R289, Government Gazette 2393 of 14 February 2003.
- 03
Government Notice R62, Government Gazette 36111 of 30 January 2013
The statutory limit was increased to R5 000.00 only with effect from 1 February 2013, after the date of the offence and sentencing.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The fine imposed on Molebogeng Moreki exceeded the statutory limit of R1 500.00 set by the Minister in terms of section 112(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act at the time of sentencing. The magistrate correctly conceded this error and referred the matter for special review. The conviction is confirmed, but the sentence is set aside and the record remitted to the magistrate for the imposition of an appropriate sentence in accordance with the statutory limit applicable at the time.
Obiter and limits
- The Minister's increase of the statutory limit to R5 000.00 only took effect after the date of sentencing and does not apply retrospectively.
- Magistrates must ensure compliance with statutory sentencing limits to avoid procedural irregularities.
Court disposition
Conviction confirmed; sentence set aside and remitted for appropriate sentencing.
- The conviction is confirmed.
- The sentence is set aside and the record is remitted back to the Magistrate for the imposition of an appropriate sentence in accordance with the legislation imposed by the Minister in terms of Government Notice R289, Government Gazette 2393 of 14 February 2003.
Source and reliance status
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Order
FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH
AFRICA
Case No.: 77/2013
In the matter between:
THE STATE
and
MOLEBOGENG MOREKI
___________
CORAM: JORDAAN, J et FISCHER, AJ
JUDGMENT: FISCHER, AJ
REVIEW ORDER
[1] Molebogeng Moreki was on 31 January 2013 charged with the crime of malicious injury to property, it being alleged that on or about 9 August 2012 and at or near Moshoeshoe, in the magisterial district of Bloemfontein, he unlawfully and intentionally damaged a window valued at approximately R200.00, being the property of alternatively in lawful possession of one Nomonde Patricia Moreki.
[2] The accused was legally represented, tendered a plea of guilty to the charge of malicious injury to property, was subsequently found guilty as charged in terms of section 112(1)(a) of Act 51 of 1977 and find R2 500,00 (two thousand five hundred rand), alternatively three months imprisonment, wholly suspended for 5 years subject to certain conditions.
[3] The matter has now been referred as a special review in terms of section 304(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, 51 of 1977 as the presiding magistrate conceded that the fine imposed was in excess of the limit of R1 500,00 (one thousand five hundred rand) provided for in terms of section 112(1)(a) of Act 51 of 1977.
[4] The presiding officer is quite correct in making the concession in that the amount determined by the Minister in the Government Gazette was at all material times limited to R1 500,00 (one thousand five hundred) in terms of Government Notice R289, Government Gazette 2393 of 14 February 2003.
[5] The Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development has subsequently and with effect from 1 February 2013 and, pursuant to the publication of Government Notice R62, dated 30 January 2013 increased such amount to R5 000,00 (five thousand rand) with effect from 1 February 2013.
[6] In the circumstances and as requested by the presiding officer the following order is made:
6.1. The conviction is confirmed;
6.2. The sentence is set aside and the record is remitted back to the Magistrate for the imposition of an appropriate sentence in accordance with the legislation imposed by the Minister in terms of Government Notice R289, Government Gazette 2393 of 14 February 2003.
___
P.U. FISCHER, AJ
I concur.
____
F. JORDAAN, J
/eb
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.