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
S v I.S (R21/2024) [2024] ZAFSHC 213 (23 July 2024)
The High Court set aside a magistrate’s conviction after it emerged the accused was 17. The prosecution must restart under the Child Justice Act.
S v S.M (R03/2022;PCJC01/2021;01/2022) [2022] ZAMPMBHC 27 (26 April 2022)
High Court review of a child justice sentence set aside an incompetent compulsory-residence order and remitted the matter for fresh sentencing.
S v B O; S v K P (181000; 181002) [2018] ZAWCHC 139 (2 November 2018)
High Court review setting aside a child’s conviction and child sentencing errors where accused were wrongly treated as adults instead of under the Child Justice Act.
S v N and Another (R431/2017) [2017] ZAFSHC 202 (26 October 2017)
The court found that although there was non-compliance with the Child Justice Act in failing to conduct a preliminary inquiry for accused 4 and 5, this irregularity was not so fundamental as to result in a failure of justice. The accused were minors at the time of the offence but were legally represented throughout the trial, their guardians were present, and they understood the proceedings. Notices for a preliminary inquiry were served, but for reasons unknown, the inquiry was not held. The oversight was condonable due to the effluxion of time and the accused having reached majority by the t…
Source excerpt
S v S.P (RCD117/2016) [2017] ZAWCHC 41 (16 February 2017)
High Court review of a child’s robbery conviction held that the magistrate corrected an age error, applied the Child Justice Act properly, and the sentence stood.
S v S.N (14/2016) [2016] ZANCHC 73 (28 October 2016)
High Court review setting aside magistrates’ court proceedings after it emerged the accused was 17 and should have been considered under the Child Justice Act.
S v H.J (DR 162/15, 44/15, 23/14112/2015) [2015] ZAKZDHC 72; 2016 (1) SACR 629 (KZD) (15 September 2015)
The conviction of the accused, a minor, was set aside because the proceedings failed to comply with the Child Justice Act, which mandates special procedures and protections for children in conflict with the law. The accused's age was only established after conviction, and the magistrate properly conceded that the conviction was invalid. The court emphasized the need for a thorough investigation into the accused's background and circumstances, and held that the matter must be recommenced de novo in accordance with the Child Justice Act, including consideration of diversion from the criminal ju…
Source excerpt
S v C.S (A74/14, A395/15, 06/2014) [2015] ZAGPPHC 520 (11 June 2015)
The court found that the prosecution and magistrate failed to comply with the Child Justice Act by not properly considering diversion after the accused completed a life skills programme for theft, and by failing to hold a preliminary enquiry for the robbery charge. The prosecutor did not record reasons for abandoning diversion, and the magistrate did not monitor or enforce its orders. The sentence imposed—detention at a treatment centre under s 296(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act—was inappropriate, as it did not consider the sentencing options under Chapter 10 of the Child Justice Act or the…
Source excerpt
S v N (57/2013) [2013] ZAGPJHC 229; 2014 (1) SACR 266 (GSJ) (5 September 2013)
High Court review setting aside a child accused’s conviction after the court found diversion procedures under the Child Justice Act were not properly followed.
S v MK (65/2012) [2012] ZAGPJHC 113; 2012 (2) SACR 533 (GSJ) (31 May 2012)
The trial court erred by disregarding the probation officer’s recommendation for diversion and rehabilitation outside prison, and by incorrectly holding that diversion is only available prior to conviction. The Child Justice Act expressly allows for diversion to be considered at any stage during the trial. The sentence of 5 years’ imprisonment was strikingly inappropriate given the accused’s age, personal circumstances, mental health challenges, and the constitutional imperative to treat child offenders differently from adults. Rehabilitation and reintegration into the family and community ar…
Source excerpt
Explore more
