South Africa Case Law

S v Mantakana (13/2018)

S v Mantakana (13/2018) [2018] ZAECBHC 7 (12 July 2018)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Bhisho

Case number

13/2018

Judges

B Hartle, I Stretch

The magistrate failed to elicit the necessary admissions from the accused to sustain a conviction under section 65(1)(a) of the National Road Traffic Act. Specifically, there was no evidence or admission that the accused's driving ability was impaired by alcohol. The questioning focused on the blood alcohol concentration, which is relevant to the alternative charge under section 65(2)(a), but not to the main count. The absence of proper questioning regarding impairment constitutes a procedural irregularity. Consequently, the conviction and sentence cannot stand and must be set aside. The matt…

Source excerpt

• Drunk Driving
• National Road Traffic Act
• Plea Of Guilty
• Section 112 Criminal Procedure Act
• Review Proceedings

S v Tokhwe (17293)

S v Tokhwe (17293) [2017] ZAWCHC 26 (22 March 2017)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

17293

Judges

Rogers, Gamble

On automatic review, the High Court confirmed a drunk-driving conviction but reduced an unduly harsh sentence for a young first offender, replacing it with a lower suspended fine.

• Drunk Driving
• Sentencing Principles
• Automatic Licence Suspension
• Magistrates Court Review
• Drunk-driving
• Sentencing

Greeff v S (A134/2013)

Greeff v S (A134/2013) [2013] ZAWCHC 128; 2014 (1) SACR 74 (WCC) (10 September 2013)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A134/2013

Judges

Saldhana, Rogers

The High Court held that the appellant’s driving licence should not be automatically suspended under the amended National Road Traffic Act.

• Drunk Driving
• National Road Traffic Act
• Automatic Suspension Of Driving Licence
• Sentencing Discretion
• Circumstances Relating To Offence
• Drunk-driving

Johnson v S (A88/10)

Johnson v S (A88/10) [2010] ZAWCHC 51 (23 March 2010)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A88/10

Judges

J M Barnard, R Allie

The High Court reduced the appellant’s imprisonment for culpable homicide and failure to render assistance to 3 years’ corrective supervision.

• Culpable Homicide
• Failure To Render Assistance
• Sentencing Principles
• Corrective Supervision
• Drunk Driving
• Culpable-homicide

S v Phillip (78/05)

S v Phillip (78/05) [2005] ZANWHC 51 (14 July 2005)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

78/05

Judges

V V Tlhapi, A A Landman

The court found that the magistrate failed to adequately question the accused regarding the effect of alcohol on his senses and driving ability. The accused admitted to consuming alcohol and pleaded guilty, but did not provide information on whether his skill and judgment were impaired. The magistrate's reliance solely on the accused's admission without probing the impact of alcohol was insufficient to establish guilt under section 65(1)(a) and (b) of the National Road Traffic Act. The proceedings were therefore not in accordance with justice, and the conviction and sentence could not stand.

Source excerpt

• Drunk Driving
• Guilty Plea Procedure
• National Road Traffic Act
• Criminal Procedure Act Section 112
• Fair Trial Rights