Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
3 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Criminal Law [2021] ZAFSHC 96

Lefu v S (A73/2019)

Lefu v S (A73/2019) [2021] ZAFSHC 96 (15 March 2021)

Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
A73/2019
Judges
Van Zyl, Majosi

The court found that while the appellant was correctly convicted of rape, robbery with aggravating circumstances, and sentenced based on overwhelming evidence including DNA, the conviction and sentence under s 51(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997 were not supported by the charge sheet or the evidence. The charge sheet failed to specify the grounds for common purpose or the applicable statutory provisions, and the evidence showed that the rapes occurred independently, without multiple acts or co-perpetration as required by s 51(1). The appellant was not properly informed of the…

Source excerpt

  • Rape
  • Minimum Sentencing
  • Common Purpose
  • Charge Sheet Amendment
  • Sexual Offences And Related Matters Act
  • Criminal Law Amendment Act
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2021] ZAFSHC 60

Lefu v S (A73/2019)

Lefu v S (A73/2019) [2021] ZAFSHC 60 (15 March 2021)

Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
A73/2019
Judges
Van Zyl, Majosi

The court found that while the appellant was correctly convicted of rape and robbery, the evidence did not support a conviction under s 51(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, as the charge sheet failed to specify the grounds for common purpose and the appellant was not adequately informed of the statutory provisions. The complainants were raped independently, and there was no evidence of multiple rapes or joint perpetration. The charge sheet was not amended to reflect common purpose, and the appellant's awareness of the minimum sentencing provisions was not canvassed. Consequently, the conv…

Source excerpt

  • Rape
  • Minimum Sentencing
  • Common Purpose
  • Charge Sheet Amendment
  • Sexual Offences And Related Matters Act
  • Criminal Law Amendment Act
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2018] ZASCA 47

Thakeli and Another v S (231/2017)

Thakeli and Another v S (231/2017) [2018] ZASCA 47; 2018 (1) SACR 621 (SCA) (28 March 2018)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
231/2017
Judges
Lewis, Seriti, Saldulker, Van der Merwe, Makgoka

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the trial court's amendment of the charge sheet after the appellants had pleaded and testified, without affording them an opportunity to address the court on the question of prejudice, constituted a fundamental irregularity. This infringed the appellants' fair trial rights and invalidated the amendment. The court held that the appellants should have been sentenced under s 51(2) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, which prescribes a minimum sentence of 15 years' imprisonment for murder, rather than under s 51(1), which carries a minimum of life imprisonmen…

Source excerpt

  • Minimum Sentencing
  • Charge Sheet Amendment
  • Fair Trial Rights
  • Prejudice
  • Criminal Procedure Act
  • Criminal Law Amendment Act
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2017] ZAGPPHC 686

Lehihi v S (A508/2016)

Lehihi v S (A508/2016) [2017] ZAGPPHC 686 (29 August 2017)

Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
A508/2016
Judges
S. A. Baqwa, L. Vuma

The court found that although the facts may have justified a sentence under section 51(1) of the Minimum Sentencing Act, the appellant was charged under section 51(2) and not properly informed that he faced life imprisonment. There was no application to amend the charge sheet before judgment or sentence. Following the Constitutional Court's decision in Ndlovu v The State, the Regional Court did not have jurisdiction to impose a life sentence in these circumstances. The conviction was upheld, but the sentence was set aside and substituted with fifteen years' imprisonment, antedated to the orig…

Source excerpt

  • Rape
  • Minimum Sentencing Act
  • Jurisdiction Of Regional Court
  • Fair Trial Rights
  • Charge Sheet Amendment
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2013] ZASCA 69

Nedzamba v S (911/2012)

Nedzamba v S (911/2012) [2013] ZASCA 69; 2013 (2) SACR 333 (SCA) (27 May 2013)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
911/2012
Judges
NAVSA, BRAND, TSHIQI, PETSE, ZONDI

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the omission of reference to the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 2007 in the indictment did not invalidate the conviction, as the crime of rape was preserved and the appellant was not prejudiced. However, the trial was fundamentally flawed due to a series of irregularities: the trial judge's unjustified interventions, leading questions by the prosecutor on critical elements, failure to ensure the child witness understood the oath, and improper restriction of cross-examination. These irregularities, individually and c…

Source excerpt

  • Rape
  • Criminal Procedure Act
  • Child Witness Protection
  • Fair Trial Rights
  • Charge Sheet Amendment
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.