South Africa Case Law

Mongale v S (K/S 4/2023)

Mongale v S (K/S 4/2023) [2025] ZANCHC 21 (14 March 2025)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

K/S 4/2023

Judge

MC Mamosebo

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success or any compelling reason for leave to appeal. The evidence of the minor witnesses was admissible, as the intermediary was properly appointed and interpretation was conducted by a sworn interpreter. The refusal to call Mosioa Pheke Shomoleile as a witness was not a mistake, as the defence was free to call any witness. The alleged contradictions in the State's case were immaterial and adequately addressed, with sufficient corroboration. Dr Kanaomang's evidence did not support the applicant's version regardi…

Source excerpt

• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Leave To Appeal
• Credibility Of Witnesses
• Reasonable Doubt
• Calling Of Witnesses

Msweli v S (SS20/2023)

Msweli v S (SS20/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1072 (21 October 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

SS20/2023

Judge

Noko

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The alleged contradictions in witness evidence were immaterial and did not undermine the reliability of the State's case. The court's decision to call additional witnesses under section 186 of the Criminal Procedure Act was justified to avoid deciding the matter on incomplete or hearsay evidence and did not improperly strengthen the prosecution's case. The applicant's personal circumstances did not provide sufficient grounds to depart from the prescribed minimum sentence, especially given the s…

Source excerpt

• Leave To Appeal
• Contradictory Evidence
• Calling Of Witnesses
• Minimum Sentencing
• Judicial Bias Allegations

S v Phooko (A243/2017)

S v Phooko (A243/2017) [2017] ZAGPPHC 793 (31 August 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A243/2017

Judges

J W Louw, A J Bam

The court found that the magistrate materially misdirected himself by denying the accused the opportunity to call police officials as witnesses. Their testimony could have corroborated the accused's version and lent credibility to his defence, particularly regarding the timing and circumstances of the incident. The denial of this opportunity deprived the accused of his constitutional right to a fair trial. As a result, the conviction and sentence could not stand, and the accused was ordered to be released from prison immediately.

Source excerpt

• Malicious Injury To Property
• Fair Trial Rights
• Material Irregularity
• Calling Of Witnesses

S v Masooa (2015/196, 2014/041)

S v Masooa (2015/196, 2014/041) [2016] ZAGPJHC 27; [2016] 2 All SA 201 (GJ); 2016 (2) SACR 224 (GJ) (17 February 2016)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2015/196, 2014/041

Judge

Spilg

Mid-trial criminal ruling on sections 167 and 186 of the CPA, allowing recall of witnesses and subpoena of experts on motorcycle controls and forensic evidence.

• Calling Of Witnesses
• Recusal Application
• Expert Evidence
• Crime Scene Reconstruction
• Forensic Evidence
• Application Of Section 186 And 167

Ledwaba v Mudau and Others (A164/14)

Ledwaba v Mudau and Others (A164/14) [2014] ZAGPPHC 596 (24 July 2014)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A164/14

Judges

BAM, F G PRELLER

The High Court dismissed a criminal review challenging a magistrate’s failure to call a witness, finding no gross irregularity or prejudice to the accused.

• Criminal Review
• Irregularity In Proceedings
• Fair Trial Rights
• Calling Of Witnesses
• Judicial Discretion
• Criminal-review

Blue Financial Services Limited v Commision For Conciliation, Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR2819/09, JA53/11)

Blue Financial Services Limited v Commision For Conciliation, Mediation And Arbitration and Others (JR2819/09, JA53/11) [2014] ZALAC 14; [2014] 10 BLLR 935 (LAC); (2014) 35 ILJ 2368 (LAC) (15 May 2014)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA 53/11

Judges

Coppin AJA, Tlaletsi DJP, Ndlovu JA

The Labour Appeal Court held that refusing a party to call a witness to rebut unfavourable evidence was a material irregularity and set aside the CCMA award.

• Unfair Dismissal
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Procedural Irregularity
• Calling Of Witnesses
• Labour-law
• Unfair-dismissal

Sithole v S (A149/2010)

Sithole v S (A149/2010) [2012] ZAGPJHC 158 (12 September 2012)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A149/2010

Judge

Satchwell

The court held that the special entry procedure under section 317 of the Criminal Procedure Act is inappropriate where the alleged irregularity—the failure to call Vusi Xaba as a witness—is apparent from the record and the matter is already on appeal. Both the prosecution and defence had access to Xaba and his statement, and both chose not to call him, indicating that neither considered his evidence beneficial. If Xaba had been called, both parties would likely have challenged his credibility and reliability, leaving the court with no reliable evidence. The court found that granting a special…

Source excerpt

• Special Entry Procedure
• Irregularity On Record
• Section 317 Cpa
• Calling Of Witnesses
• Section 186 Cpa

S v Gabaatlholwe and Another (96/2002)

S v Gabaatlholwe and Another (96/2002) [2002] ZASCA 149; [2003] 1 All SA 1 (SCA); 2003 (1) SACR 313 (SCA) (28 November 2002)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

96/2002

Judges

Scott JA, Farlam JA, Heher AJA

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that refusing to subpoena a witness under section 186 was not erroneous because the evidence was not essential to a just decision.

• Criminal Procedure Act Section 186
• Rape
• Kidnapping
• Judicial Discretion
• Calling Of Witnesses
• Criminal-procedure