South Africa Case Law

Lotz v S (AR119/P)

Lotz v S (AR119/P) [2022] ZAKZPHC 40; 2023 (1) SACR 88 (KZP) (26 August 2022)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

AR119/P

Judges

Mossop, Koen

The appellant was convicted in his personal capacity for operating a public transport service vehicle without the necessary permit, but the evidence established that he did not personally operate the vehicle, was not present at the time of the offence, and was not the owner or driver. The charge sheet failed to cite him as a representative of the corporate body, and there was no mention of the company in the charge sheet. The State did not prove the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the conviction was based on a procedural error. The appeal was upheld, and the conviction and sent…

Source excerpt

• Corporate Criminal Liability
• Charge Sheet Deficiency
• Burden Of Proof
• National Land Transport Act
• Criminal Procedure Act

S v Scholtz (K/S 20/2013)

S v Scholtz (K/S 20/2013) [2016] ZANCHC 90 (6 December 2016)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

K/S 20/2013

Judge

Phatshoane

High Court sentencing judgment for corruption and money laundering convictions arising from the Trifecta matter, imposing prison terms and corporate fines.

• Corruption
• Money Laundering
• Minimum Sentencing
• Corporate Criminal Liability
• Prevention Of Organised Crime Act
• Prevention And Combating Of Corrupt Activities Act

S v Blue Platinum Ventures (Pty) Limited and Another (A588/15)

S v Blue Platinum Ventures (Pty) Limited and Another (A588/15) [2015] ZAGPPHC 980 (25 August 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A588/15

Judges

Tuchten, EM Kubushi

On automatic review, the High Court remitted the matter because the regional court failed to convict and sentence Blue Platinum Ventures after a guilty plea.

• National Environmental Management Act
• Plea Of Guilty
• Irregularity In Proceedings
• Corporate Criminal Liability
• Guilty-plea
• Criminal-review

Janse van Rensburg v S (A452/2010)

Janse van Rensburg v S (A452/2010) [2010] ZAWCHC 593 (1 December 2010)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A452/2010

Judges

P Blignault, B J Manca

The High Court dismissed an appeal against a theft conviction, holding that the appellant’s volunteer delivery of goods to a supplier amounted to appropriation.

• Theft
• Mens Rea
• Actus Reus
• Corporate Criminal Liability
• Criminal-appeal
• Appropriation

SA Metal & Machinery Co (Pty) Ltd v S (398/09)

SA Metal & Machinery Co (Pty) Ltd v S (398/09) [2010] ZASCA 81; 2010 (2) SACR 413 (S (28 May 2010)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

398/09

Judges

Navsa, Van Heerden, Bosielo

The Supreme Court of Appeal set aside SA Metal’s conviction for receiving stolen copper cathodes, holding the State’s charge was limited to named employees and amendment would prejudice the defence.

• Corporate Criminal Liability
• Statutory Presumption
• Reasonable Cause
• Amendment Of Charge Sheet
• Corporate-criminal-liability
• Statutory-presumption

Minister van Justisie, Ex Parte In Re: S v Suid-Afrikaanse Uitsaaikorporasie (130/91)

Minister van Justisie, Ex Parte In Re: S v Suid-Afrikaanse Uitsaaikorporasie (130/91) [1992] ZASCA 175; 1992 (4) SA 804 (AD); [1992] 2 All SA 472 (A) ; [1992] 2 All SA 478 (A) (28 September 1992)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

130/91

Judges

Corbett, Van Heerden, Grosskopf, Goldstone, Harms

The court held that section 332(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1977, does apply to offences based on negligence. The section provides that the acts or omissions of a director or servant, performed in the exercise of their powers or duties or in furtherance of the corporation's interests, are deemed to be those of the corporation. While intent (dolus) can be projected onto the corporation, negligence (culpa) is not a subjective mental state but an objective standard applied to conduct. Therefore, if the facts establish that the conduct was negligent, the corporation can be held criminally l…

Source excerpt

• Corporate Criminal Liability
• Culpa Vs Dolus
• Statutory Interpretation
• Mens Rea
• Criminal Procedure Act

S v Koch and Others (670/89)

S v Koch and Others (670/89) [1990] ZASCA 137 (23 November 1990)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

670/89

Judges

E.M. Grosskopf, Eksteen, Nienaber

The court set aside Otto Koch’s fraud conviction, finding the State had not proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt, but upheld the convictions of Elizabeth and Ivan Ramsay.

• Fraud
• Onus Of Proof
• Accomplice Evidence
• Duress
• Sentencing
• Corporate Criminal Liability