South Africa Case Law

Hall v S (A173/21)

Hall v S (A173/21) [2021] ZAWCHC 231 (12 November 2021)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A173/21

Judges

Goliath, Montzinger

The appeal court found that the evidence of Officer Botla regarding the time of blood draw was uncontested and supported by his pocketbook and affidavit, establishing that the blood was drawn within the statutory two-hour period. The inference that Dr Naidoo was a registered medical practitioner was justified by objective facts and not challenged by the appellant. The chain of custody was proven, as the seals were intact and no evidence of tampering was presented. The presumption under section 65(4) of the National Road Traffic Act applied, as there was no evidence of contamination. The secti…

Source excerpt

• Driving Under Influence
• Chain Of Custody
• Blood Alcohol Analysis
• Presumption Of Cleanliness
• Calibration Of Instruments

Eke v S (CA&R 163/14)

Eke v S (CA&R 163/14) [2015] ZAECGHC 16; 2016 (1) SACR 135 (ECG) (26 March 2015)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

CA&R 163/14

Judges

Plasket, Makaula, Lowe

The court held that a certificate issued under section 212(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which sets out the qualifications of the analyst, describes the process used, explains reliability, and provides the result, constitutes prima facie proof of both the blood alcohol concentration and the proper calibration of the gas chromatographs. Section 212(10) does not apply in the absence of ministerial prescription regarding gas chromatographs. The appellant's plea explanation, which merely placed the accuracy of the result in issue, did not amount to evidence and was insufficient to disturb the…

Source excerpt

• Blood Alcohol Analysis
• Certificate Evidence
• Calibration Of Instruments
• Prima Facie Proof
• Road Traffic Offences

S v Muhl (A691/06)

S v Muhl (A691/06) [2007] ZAGPHC 288 (27 November 2007)

Court

High Courts - Gauteng

Case number

A691/06

Judges

M F Legodi, A P Ledwaba

Appeal in a drunk-driving and negligent-driving case. The court set aside the first alternative conviction, confirmed the negligent-driving conviction, and refused the State’s bid to substitute the acquittal.

• Driving Under The Influence
• Blood Alcohol Analysis
• Chain Of Evidence
• Reckless Driving
• Admissibility Of Expert Evidence
• Criminal-appeal