South Africa Case Law

Ngonhamo and Another v S - Appeal (A309/2022)

Ngonhamo and Another v S - Appeal (A309/2022) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1870 (24 October 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A309/2022

Judges

NTLAMA-MAKHANYA, LA RETIEF

The court found that the trial court misdirected itself in its application of the principles of circumstantial evidence and the doctrine of common purpose. The trial court failed to require forensic analysis of the blood found in the vehicle, relying instead on subjective impressions, which did not meet the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt. The inference drawn from the appellants' silence was improperly treated as a self-created risk, undermining the constitutional right to remain silent. The evidence was insufficient to establish a direct link between the appellants, particularly th…

Source excerpt

• Circumstantial Evidence
• Doctrine Of Common Purpose
• Right To Remain Silent
• Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt
• Misdirection
• Automatic Appeal

Kapa v S (CCT 292/21)

Kapa v S (CCT 292/21) [2023] ZACC 1; 2023 (4) BCLR 370 (CC); 2023 (1) SACR 583 (CC) (24 January 2023)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT 292/21

Judges

Baqwa AJ, Kollapen J, Madlanga J, Majiedt J, Mathopo J, Mbatha AJ, Mhlantla J, Rogers J, Tshiqi J

The Constitutional Court held that the admission of Ms Dasi's hearsay statement was justified under section 3(1)(c) of the Law of Evidence Amendment Act, as the interests of justice required its admission. The statement was contemporaneous, provided a first-hand account of the assault, and was corroborated by forensic, DNA, and circumstantial evidence. Although the applicant was prejudiced by the inability to cross-examine Ms Dasi, the cumulative weight of the evidence established a strong prima facie case of his involvement in the murder. The Court found that the High Court correctly admitte…

Source excerpt

• Admission Of Hearsay Evidence
• Fair Trial Rights
• Law Of Evidence Amendment Act
• Section 35 Constitution
• Doctrine Of Common Purpose
• Minimum Sentence

Zulu v S (AR44/18)

Zulu v S (AR44/18) [2021] ZAKZPHC 9 (3 February 2021)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

AR44/18

Judges

Chetty, Chilli

The High Court set aside convictions for possessing unlicensed firearms and ammunition, holding that mere presence in the vehicle did not prove joint possession.

• Joint Possession
• Unlawful Possession Of Firearms
• Unlawful Possession Of Ammunition
• Doctrine Of Common Purpose
• Firearms Control Act
• Joint-possession

Chaba and Others v S (A190/2017)

Chaba and Others v S (A190/2017) [2019] ZAFSHC 108; [2019] 3 All SA 103 (FB) (22 March 2019)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A190/2017

Judges

Rampai, Mathebula, Loubser

The court found that the cumulative circumstantial evidence, including the discovery of illegal gold refinery plants, documents, photographs, and the circumstances of arrest, established beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants participated in an organized racketeering enterprise involving illegal mining, theft of precious metals, and money laundering. The physical extraction of ore satisfied the element of appropriation required for theft, regardless of whether the ore remained on the mine premises. The doctrine of common purpose was correctly applied, as the evidence showed active associ…

Source excerpt

• Racketeering
• Illegal Mining
• Theft Of Precious Metals
• Money Laundering
• Doctrine Of Common Purpose
• Precious Metals Act

Mahlangu v S (383/2017)

Mahlangu v S (383/2017) [2019] ZAGPPHC 35 (25 February 2019)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

383/2017

Judges

Munzhelele, Nair

The High Court upheld an appeal against conviction for housebreaking and robbery, finding the identification evidence inadequate and the state’s proof insufficient.

• Identification Evidence
• Doctrine Of Common Purpose
• Recent Possession
• Onus Of Proof
• Acquittal
• Appeal Interference

Gwababa v S (1290/2016)

Gwababa v S (1290/2016) [2018] ZASCA 152 (8 November 2018)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1290/2016

Judges

Cachalia, Saldulker, Mbha, Matojane, Rogers

The Supreme Court of Appeal set aside its earlier refusal of leave and granted Lungisa Gwababa leave to appeal his murder conviction to the full court.

• Leave To Appeal
• Doctrine Of Common Purpose
• Dolus Eventualis
• Reconsideration Under Superior Courts Act
• Leave-to-appeal
• Common-purpose

Malele v S; Ngobeni and Others v S (724/16)

Malele v S; Ngobeni and Others v S (724/16) [2016] ZASCA 115 (13 September 2016)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

724/16

Judge

Mpati

The SCA granted condonation and referred a refusal of special leave to appeal for reconsideration, finding possible grave injustice and exceptional circumstances.

• Leave To Appeal
• Doctrine Of Common Purpose
• Dolus Eventualis
• Condonation
• Superior Courts Act Section 17 2 F
• Leave-to-appeal

Moodley v S (A526/15)

Moodley v S (A526/15) [2016] ZAGPPHC 370 (10 May 2016)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A526/15

Judges

Molopa-Sethosa, Rabie, Meyer

The High Court reduced a 17-year-old offender’s effective sentence from 43 to 18 years, finding the original cumulative sentence excessive and failing to account for concurrency.

• Sentencing Of Child Offenders
• Concurrent Sentences
• Aggravating And Mitigating Factors
• Doctrine Of Common Purpose
• Appeal Interference
• Effective Term Of Imprisonment