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
L.B.Z v National Director of Prosecutions (1195/2019) [2025] ZAMPMHC 23 (4 March 2025)
The High Court dismissed a malicious prosecution claim, finding the prosecutor had reasonable grounds to charge the plaintiff as an accomplice to rape.
Mkhize v Director of Public Prosecutions KwaZulu-Natal (CCD38/2023) [2024] ZAKZDHC 89; 2025 (1) SACR 392 (KZD) (9 December 2024)
The application for separation of trials is premature because section 157(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act only empowers the trial court to order separation during the trial, after the accused have pleaded. The indictment remains under the control of the prosecuting authority until the trial commences, and any intervention by the court before this point is limited to specific statutory grounds. The amended indictment further strengthens the connection between the applicant and the principal accused, making separation impractical and contrary to legal policy. Judicial discretion regarding sepa…
Source excerpt
S v Neoth and Another (SS52/2020) [2022] ZAGPJHC 768 (29 September 2022)
The High Court dismissed leave to appeal against a conviction for accessory after the fact to murder, finding no reasonable prospect of success.
S v Neoth and Another (SS52/2020) [2022] ZAGPJHC 767 (28 September 2022)
Sentencing judgment in a murder matter: one accused received five years for accessory after the fact to murder, the other two consecutive 15-year murder sentences.
S v Neoth and Another (SS52/2020) [2022] ZAGPJHC 749 (19 September 2022)
High Court murder trial: Bernard Noeth convicted of two murders; Susana Noeth convicted as accessory after the fact, with alternative obstruction count dismissed.
S v Moyo (SS25/2021) [2022] ZAGPJHC 56 (4 February 2022)
The High Court convicted Samson Moyo of murder and attempted murder, finding he actively associated himself with the attack on an elderly couple under common purpose.
S v Moloi and Others (121/2019) [2019] ZAFSHC 96 (28 June 2019)
High Court held that a magistrate’s verdict could not be amended under section 176 because the error arose from the merits, not a mere mistake.
S v Horne and Another (CC3/2018) [2018] ZAECPEHC 45 (13 August 2018)
The High Court convicted Shaan Horne of murder and firearm offences, acquitted both accused of theft, and rejected an accessory-after-the-fact case against Shane Arends.
S v Coetzee and Others (73/2015) [2016] ZAWCHC 166 (17 November 2016)
High Court criminal trial on murder, robbery, and firearm charges arising from a fatal garage shooting in Cape Town.
Hattingh v S (A307/2015) [2016] ZAWCHC 199 (28 October 2016)
The appeal was upheld because the Regional Magistrate materially misdirected himself in his assessment of the evidence and application of the law. The conviction of the appellant was based on speculation and conjecture rather than proven facts. The circumstantial evidence did not exclude every reasonable inference other than guilt, and there was no reliable evidence that the appellant acted with criminal intent, formed a common purpose with accused 1, or was an accessory after the fact. The appellant's failure to testify did not relieve the State of its burden to prove guilt beyond reasonable…
Source excerpt
Explore more
