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
P.W v S (CA&R7/2022) [2022] ZANCHC 26 (20 May 2022)
The High Court dismissed the conviction appeal in a rape matter but set aside the life sentence, replacing it with 10 years’ imprisonment.
Daniel v PRASA (01663/14) [2019] ZAGPJHC 139 (9 May 2019)
The High Court granted a postponement of a trial so the plaintiff could call expert evidence on brain injury, but ordered him to pay wasted costs.
National Director of Public Prosecutions v Regional Court Magistrate and Others (1721/2017) [2018] ZANCHC 47 (15 June 2018)
High Court review of a magistrate’s child-witness competency ruling in a rape and kidnapping trial, setting aside the proceedings for gross irregularity.
Macinezela v S (550/2017) [2018] ZASCA 32; 2018 (2) SACR 573 (SCA) (26 March 2018)
The Supreme Court of Appeal set aside a rape conviction because the trial court failed to inquire into a mentally unstable complainant’s competence to testify.
Nobela v S (A573/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 768 (27 October 2017)
The High Court upheld the appeal, finding the complainant’s evidence inadmissible because section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Act was not properly applied.
Mahlaba v S (A109/2016) [2016] ZAFSHC 135 (19 August 2016)
High Court appeal dismissed against rape conviction and life sentence for raping a mentally disabled 14-year-old complainant.
Baas and Others v S (A323/2011) [2011] ZAGPPHC 80 (26 May 2011)
The court found that the trial Magistrate did not display bias and treated the complainant with appropriate sensitivity. The failure to rule on the recusal application and admissibility of the statement did not prejudice the appellants, who were legally represented and did not pursue these issues further. The complainant was found to be a competent witness under section 164(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, given her age and responses. The trial court misdirected itself by applying the minimum sentencing provisions to child offenders, as the appellants were under 18 at the time of the offence…
Source excerpt
Mokwa v S (CAF 06/2010) [2011] ZANWHC 15 (31 March 2011)
The appeal succeeded because the proceedings were tainted by serious irregularities. The magistrate failed to properly ascertain whether the complainant, a minor, understood the nature and import of the oath, and the appellant's evidence was unsworn and thus inadmissible. Material contradictions and lack of corroboration in the State's evidence, including inconsistencies regarding the rape complaint and absence of medical confirmation, rendered the conviction unsafe. The trial court's reliance on uncorroborated evidence and its misinterpretation of the facts undermined the reliability of the…
Source excerpt
S v Rahlau (344/2010) [2010] ZAFSHC 74 (5 August 2010)
The court held that the complainant, as the accused's wife and the victim of the alleged contravention of a protection order, was both a competent and compellable witness for the prosecution under section 195(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The magistrate's failure to explain the section to the complainant did not constitute a gross irregularity, as the statutory exception applied and the complainant's attitude was irrelevant in the circumstances. The court found no basis for extraordinary review of the unterminated proceedings, as no grave injustice or irreversible miscarriage of justic…
Source excerpt
S v Katoo (642/2002) [2004] ZASCA 109; [2006] 4 All SA 348 (SCA); 2005 (1) SACR 522 (SCA) (30 November 2004)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that a mentally retarded complainant was not automatically incompetent to testify under section 194 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Explore more
