South Africa Case Law

Firstrand Bank Limited v Ayob and Another (045157/2023)

Firstrand Bank Limited v Ayob and Another (045157/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 350 (15 April 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

045157/2023

Judge

Baqwa

The court found that the suretyships were executed in manuscript during a virtual meeting, as evidenced by video footage and corroborated by the applicant's representative. The respondents' claims of electronic execution and forgery were contradicted by their earlier admissions and the memorandum of agreement acknowledging their indebtedness. The video footage and email copies of the suretyships were admissible under section 15 of the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, and the respondents retained the originals. The respondents' defences were rejected as unsustainable and deceitf…

Source excerpt

• Suretyship
• Electronic Signature
• Admissibility Of Video Evidence
• Contract Enforcement
• General Law Amendment Act
• Electronic Communications And Transactions Act

Human v S (CA&R 221/2023)

Human v S (CA&R 221/2023) [2024] ZAECMKHC 46 (7 May 2024)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

CA&R 221/2023

Judges

Rugunanan, Ellis

Appeal against a murder conviction succeeded because the State’s evidence was unreliable and the CCTV footage did not show the stabbing.

• Murder
• Onus Of Proof
• Credibility Of Witnesses
• Admissibility Of Video Evidence
• Appeal Procedure
• Criminal-law

Kenku v S (A65/2015)

Kenku v S (A65/2015) [2016] ZAFSHC 201 (10 November 2016)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A65/2015

Judges

Van Zyl, Mokoena

Appeal in a robbery and attempted murder case. Conviction on count 1 was set aside because missing video footage tainted identification evidence; other convictions largely stood.

• Identification Evidence
• Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances
• Attempted Murder
• Minimum Sentencing
• Admissibility Of Video Evidence
• Resisting Arrest

Kotze v S (A19/2014)

Kotze v S (A19/2014) [2014] ZAFSHC 156 (11 September 2014)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A19/2014

Judges

N.P. Jaji, L.J. Lekale

The High Court set aside a criminal conviction and sentence after finding that the magistrate relied on video evidence without properly allowing the unrepresented accused to challenge it.

• Admissibility Of Video Evidence
• Procedural Irregularity
• Burden Of Proof
• Unrepresented Accused
• Criminal-appeal
• Video-evidence

S v Mdlongwa (99/10)

S v Mdlongwa (99/10) [2010] ZASCA 82; 2010 (2) SACR 419 (SCA) (31 May 2010)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

99/10

Judges

Mthiyane, Mhlantla, Saldulker

The Supreme Court of Appeal upheld Mdlongwa’s conviction and 20-year sentence for bank robbery, finding the identification evidence and video footage reliable.

• Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances
• Identification Evidence
• Facial Comparison Expert
• Admissibility Of Video Evidence
• Sentencing Principles
• Robbery-with-aggravating-circumstances