South Africa Case Law

Van Aswegen v District Magistrate Atlantis and Another (15846/2023)

Van Aswegen v District Magistrate Atlantis and Another (15846/2023) [2024] ZAWCHC 135 (20 May 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

15846/2023

Judges

C N Nziweni, R Parker

The Court held that the refusal by the magistrate to discharge the applicant at the close of the State's case does not constitute a reviewable irregularity under section 22 of the Superior Courts Act. The applicant failed to demonstrate any gross irregularity, bias, or procedural unfairness in the magistrate's conduct. The alleged errors and comments by the magistrate did not materially affect the fairness of the proceedings or the outcome of the discharge application. The Court emphasized that mere errors in law or dissatisfaction with the exercise of discretion are not grounds for review, a…

Source excerpt

• Section 174 Discharge
• Gross Irregularity
• Review Jurisdiction
• Defeating Or Obstructing Administration Of Justice

Macrae and Another v S (93/2013)

Macrae and Another v S (93/2013) [2014] ZASCA 37; 2014 (2) SACR 215 (SCA) (28 March 2014)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

93/2013

Judges

Mhlantla, Wallis, Mocumie

Appeal against convictions for theft and obstructing justice over a seized baboon. The SCA set aside all convictions, finding no criminal intent and an unfair trial.

• Theft
• Defeating Or Obstructing Administration Of Justice
• Fair Trial Rights
• Criminal Procedure Act
• Nature Conservation Ordinance
• Duplication Of Convictions

S v De Beer (CC139/2012)

S v De Beer (CC139/2012) [2014] ZAGPPHC 1074 (12 March 2014)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

CC139/2012

Judge

Makgoka

The court found that the accused lured the deceased to Mr Taute's house with the intention to murder him and rob him of his vehicle. The accused's version of self-defence was rejected as improbable and unsupported by objective evidence, including the post-mortem report and the accused's conduct after the crime. The court held that the killing was premeditated and that the accused's actions after the murder, including disposing of the body and lying about the vehicle, demonstrated callousness and a lack of remorse. The court considered the accused's youth, socio-economic background, and conduc…

Source excerpt

• Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances
• Premeditated Murder
• Theft
• Defeating Or Obstructing Administration Of Justice
• Minimum Sentencing
• Substantial And Compelling Circumstances