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
S v Ciya (KS11/2024) [2025] ZANCHC 59 (21 July 2025)
The High Court acquitted the accused of murder and defeating justice after finding the State’s single-witness and circumstantial evidence unreliable.
Aletta v S (2024/A36) [2025] ZAGPJHC 380 (8 April 2025)
The High Court upheld the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant in a child-death prosecution arising from a family altercation.
S v Bjanyane - Appeal (A51/2020) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1087; 2024 (1) SACR 428 (GJ) (28 September 2023)
The court held that sections 315 and 316 of the Criminal Procedure Act only afford a right of appeal to accused persons and do not permit the State to appeal an acquittal to the Full Court. The only route for the State to appeal an acquittal from the High Court is under section 319 by reserving a question of law arising on the trial, which may be done after judgment. The court found that the State had followed the incorrect statutory procedure and, as a result, the Full Court lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal. The point in limine raised by the respondent was upheld, and the appeal was st…
Source excerpt
Director of Public Prosecutions, Northern Cape v Swarts and Another (KS19/2016) [2022] ZANCHC 57; 2023 (1) SACR 101 (NCK) (7 October 2022)
The High Court held that the State’s s 319 application raised factual disputes, not questions of law, and dismissed the appeal.
Director of Public Prosecutions: Gauteng Division, Pretoria v Pooe (348/2019) [2021] ZASCA 55; [2021] 3 All SA 23 (SCA); 2021 (2) SACR 115 (SCA) (30 April 2021)
The Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed the State’s application for leave to appeal, holding that the proposed reservations were factual, not legal, questions.
Mahlangu v S (383/2017) [2019] ZAGPPHC 35 (25 February 2019)
The High Court upheld an appeal against conviction for housebreaking and robbery, finding the identification evidence inadequate and the state’s proof insufficient.
Williams v S (CA&R119/2016) [2016] ZAECGHC 138 (22 November 2016)
The appeal was upheld because the trial court erred in convicting the appellant of robbery without sufficient evidence establishing his participation in the removal of the shoes from the deceased. The appellant's explanation for possession of the shoes was reasonably possibly true and not disproved beyond reasonable doubt. The doctrine of recent possession did not justify a conviction for theft, as there was no evidence that the appellant was a party to the theft or acting on behalf of a thief. The State failed to discharge its burden of proof, and the appellant was entitled to acquittal on b…
Source excerpt
Kwatiso v S (A705/2015) [2016] ZAGPPHC 962 (1 November 2016)
The High Court upheld an appeal against convictions for rape and housebreaking, finding the evidence insufficient and setting aside the sentence and firearm order.
Thubeni and Others v S (A509/2015) [2016] ZAGPPHC 1242 (14 October 2016)
The High Court upheld a criminal appeal, finding the State had not proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants were involved in the fatal attack.
S v Tlhoboro ; S v Makhubela and Another (32/2014 , 33/2014) [2015] ZANWHC 2 (22 January 2015)
High Court special review of two criminal matters after the magistrate resigned before completion. One matter was set aside for a de novo trial; the other ended in acquittal.
Explore more
