South Africa Case Law

Sibanye Gold Protection Service Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 637/23)

Sibanye Gold Protection Service Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 637/23) [2025] ZALCJHB 130 (27 March 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR 637/23

Judge

Lagrange

The court found that the arbitrator failed to properly weigh the credibility and probabilities of the conflicting versions presented by the supervisor and the employee. The arbitrator discounted the supervisor's testimony solely due to lack of clear photographic corroboration, while accepting the employee's version without similar scrutiny. The court held that the arbitrator's reasoning was materially flawed and that, had the probabilities and inherent plausibility of each version been properly evaluated, no reasonable arbitrator could have concluded that the employee was not guilty of sleepi…

Source excerpt

• Dismissal For Misconduct
• Sleeping On Duty
• Evaluation Of Evidence
• Arbitration Review
• Substantive Fairness

Ndyamarha and Another v S (Appeal) (CA & R 245/2022)

Ndyamarha and Another v S (Appeal) (CA & R 245/2022) [2025] ZAECMKHC 22 (11 March 2025)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

CA&R 245/2022

Judges

Metu, S.A. Collett

The court found that the evidence established the essential elements of theft. The appellants received payment for accommodation that was never provided, and the 'virtual bed & breakfast' entities were fictitious. The first appellant conceded under cross-examination that he had no legitimate claim to the funds. The argument that the matter was a civil breach of contract was rejected, as the facts satisfied the requirements for theft as set out in S v Boesak. The trial magistrate's factual findings were upheld, and there was no basis for interference by the appeal court.

Source excerpt

• Theft
• Elements Of Crime
• Distinction Between Theft And Breach Of Contract
• Evaluation Of Evidence
• Animus Furandi

Strydom v S (A 236/24)

Strydom v S (A 236/24) [2025] ZAWCHC 84 (11 February 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A236/24

Judges

Wille, Parker

The High Court dismissed the conviction appeal for robbery with aggravating circumstances, but reduced the sentence from 15 years to 8 years.

• Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances
• Minimum Sentencing
• Appeal On Sentence
• Onus Of Proof
• Evaluation Of Evidence
• Robbery-with-aggravating-circumstances

Mnculwane v S (A35/2024)

Mnculwane v S (A35/2024) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1070 (28 October 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A35/2024

Judges

Engelbrecht, Holland-Muter

The High Court dismissed an appeal against conviction and life sentence for rape, finding the evidence was properly assessed, the alibi failed, and no sentencing misdirection was shown.

• Sexual Offences Act
• Alibi Defence
• Evaluation Of Evidence
• Sentencing Discretion
• Minimum Sentences
• Rape-conviction-appeal

Mzini v S (CA&R48/2024)

Mzini v S (CA&R48/2024) [2024] ZAECMKHC 111 (1 October 2024)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

CA&R48/2024

Judges

D.T. Young, T.V. Norman

The appeal court found that the trial court correctly evaluated the evidence as a whole, giving proper consideration to the credibility of the complainant and corroborating witnesses, as well as the medical evidence. The appellant's reliance on a single contradiction was misplaced, as the overall evidence overwhelmingly supported the State's case. The trial court's findings of fact were not shown to be clearly wrong or materially misdirected. Regarding sentence, the court held that the appellant's personal circumstances, including time spent in custody and the age of his previous conviction,…

Source excerpt

• Rape
• Kidnapping
• Minimum Sentencing
• Evaluation Of Evidence
• Substantial And Compelling Circumstances

MEC for the Free State Department of Police, Roads and Transport v L.J.DT and Others (4312/2021)

MEC for the Free State Department of Police, Roads and Transport v L.J.DT and Others (4312/2021) [2024] ZAFSHC 261 (22 August 2024)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

4312/2021

Judge

Gusha AJ

The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal, holding that the applicant had not shown reasonable prospects of success and ordering costs on scale B.

• Leave To Appeal
• Reasonable Prospects Of Success
• Evaluation Of Evidence
• Costs Order
• Leave-to-appeal
• Reasonable-prospects-of-success

Mabuza v Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform & Rural Development and Others (LCC125/2020)

Mabuza v Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform & Rural Development and Others (LCC125/2020) [2024] ZALCC 14 (26 January 2024)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC125/2020

Judges

Meer, Kgoele

The Land Claims Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal in a land restitution matter, finding no reasonable prospects of success and making no costs order.

• Land Restoration Claims
• Leave To Appeal
• Dispossession Of Rights
• Evaluation Of Evidence
• Leave-to-appeal
• Land-restitution

Raadt v S - Appeal (A82/2023)

Raadt v S - Appeal (A82/2023) [2024] ZAFSHC 16 (24 January 2024)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A82/2023

Judges

Opperman, Lekhoaba

The High Court dismissed an appeal against rape convictions and life sentences, finding the evidence sufficient and no substantial and compelling circumstances to reduce sentence.

• Rape
• Minimum Sentences Act
• Substantial And Compelling Circumstances
• Evaluation Of Evidence
• Mitigation Of Sentence
• Minimum-sentences

Fourie v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services - Appeal (39/2023)

Fourie v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services - Appeal (39/2023) [2024] ZAECMKHC 2 (16 January 2024)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

39/2023

Judges

N Cengani-Mbakaza, N Beshe

The appeal court found that the trial Magistrate misdirected herself by failing to properly evaluate the totality of the evidence and the principles applicable to mutually destructive versions. The plaintiff's version was corroborated by medical evidence and photographs, while the defendant's version was improbable and unsupported. The injuries suffered by the plaintiff were consistent with an assault by correctional officials, not accidental self-infliction. The principles of self-defence were inapplicable as no credible evidence supported an imminent attack by the plaintiff. The trial court…

Source excerpt

• Wrongful Assault
• Quantum Of Damages
• Burden Of Proof
• Evaluation Of Evidence
• Self Defence
• Constitutional Rights

Michael Jantjies v S (532/2022)

Michael Jantjies v S (532/2022) [2024] ZASCA 3 (15 January 2024)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

532/2022

Judges

Nicholls, Carelse, Matojane, Musi, Tokota

The Supreme Court of Appeal upheld Michael Jantjies’ appeal, finding the courts below misread the evidence and that the State failed to prove rape beyond reasonable doubt.

• Rape
• Single Witness Evidence
• Burden Of Proof
• Reasonable Doubt
• Evaluation Of Evidence
• Criminal-law