Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Criminal Law [2024] ZALMPPHC 146

Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Limpopo v Olivier (P12/2024)

Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Limpopo v Olivier (P12/2024) [2024] ZALMPPHC 146; 2025 (1) SACR 543 (LP) (4 November 2024)

Court
Limpopo High Court, Polokwane
Case number
P12/2024
Judges
G.C Muller, M. Monene

The court held that section 335 of the Criminal Procedure Act does not preclude the State from invoking section 60(14) in bail proceedings. Section 60(14) is a special provision that restricts access to information in the police docket, including statements made by the accused, for the purpose of bail unless the prosecutor directs otherwise. The general right under section 335 is ousted by the specific restriction in section 60(14) in the context of bail applications. The respondent, charged with a Schedule 6 offence, must invoke section 60(11) to seek access to his statement for bail purpose…

Source excerpt

  • Bail Application
  • Access To Police Docket
  • Criminal Procedure Act
  • Schedule 6 Offence
  • Disclosure Of Evidence
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2008] ZAGPHC 271

McBride v Regional Magistrate Pretoria and Another (A394/2008)

McBride v Regional Magistrate Pretoria and Another (A394/2008) [2008] ZAGPHC 271 (11 September 2008)

Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Case number
A394/2008
Judges
N.M. Mavundla, K. Makhafola

The High Court found that the magistrate's refusal to grant access to section 204 witness statements was irregular and not based on a bona fide, informed decision. The applicant's constitutional right to a fair trial, including the right to prepare his defence and to adduce and challenge evidence, would be negatively impacted by denial of access to the requested documents. The State has a corollary obligation to make full disclosure of relevant documents in the police docket to the accused. The Court held that intervention at this stage is warranted to prevent potential prejudice to the appli…

Source excerpt

  • Access To Police Docket
  • Right To Fair Trial
  • Mandamus
  • Section 204 Statements
  • Disclosure Of Evidence
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2006] ZAGPHC 108

S v Levenstein (317/04)

S v Levenstein (317/04) [2006] ZAGPHC 108 (20 December 2006)

Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Case number
317/2004
Judge
I W Schwartzman

The court found that the accused had been provided with all necessary documentation, including the indictment, summary of substantial facts, witness statements, and the police docket. The accused demonstrated a full understanding of the State's case and had set out his defence in detail. The application for further and better particulars was not a genuine attempt to obtain necessary information but rather an effort to have the State respond to the accused's version of events and to debate the evidence pre-trial. The court held that the accused was adequately informed of the case against him a…

Source excerpt

  • Further And Better Particulars
  • Criminal Procedure Act Section 87
  • Right To Fair Trial
  • Access To Police Docket
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.