Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Brown and Others v S - Appeal (CA 45/2020) [2024] ZAECMKHC 8; 2024 (1) SACR 403 (ECMk) (23 January 2024)
The High Court upheld an appeal because the trial court failed to rule on admissibility under section 35(5) after invalid and warrantless searches.
Groenewald and Others v S (A668/2010) [2019] ZAWCHC 170 (10 December 2019)
The High Court dismissed a sentence appeal in an abalone racketeering matter, holding that direct imprisonment was justified and no misdirection was shown.
S v Brown and Others (CC18/2017) [2019] ZAECPEHC 12; [2019] 2 All SA 622 (ECP) (1 March 2019)
The court found that abalone poaching and racketeering are serious offences with significant societal and environmental impact. The evidence established that Accused 1 was the employer and principal beneficiary of the criminal enterprise, with Accused 2 and 3 playing significant roles. Mitigating factors such as personal circumstances and lack of financial benefit were considered but did not outweigh the need for deterrence and the seriousness of the offences. Previous non-custodial sentences have proven ineffective in deterring abalone poaching, and the legislature prescribes severe penaltie…
Source excerpt
S v Blignault (CC20/2018) [2018] ZAECPEHC 57 (19 September 2018)
Sentencing judgment in an abalone poaching case. The High Court treated several counts as one and imposed 20 years’ imprisonment on Morne Blignault.
Roberts and Others v S (CA10/2015) [2015] ZAECGHC 92 (25 August 2015)
The appeal court found no basis to interfere with the sentences imposed by the trial court. The offences involved racketeering activities relating to unlawful trade in abalone, which are considered extremely serious under South African law. The trial court had properly considered the appellants' personal circumstances, previous convictions, and the gravity of the offences. The sentences imposed were consistent with those in similar cases involving racketeering, and did not appear to be startlingly inappropriate or disproportionate. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
