South Africa Case Law

Makalala v Unit Commander, Bellville Vehicle Crime Investigation Unit and Another (25568/2024)

Makalala v Unit Commander, Bellville Vehicle Crime Investigation Unit and Another (25568/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 2; 2025 (2) SACR 43 (WCC) (13 January 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

25568/2024

Judge

Lekhuleni

The applicant established ownership and possession of the vehicles, shifting the onus to the respondents to justify retention. The respondents provided expert forensic evidence confirming that all three vehicles had been tampered with in contravention of section 68(6)(b) of the National Road Traffic Act. The court found that possession of such vehicles is unlawful, even for the owner, and that the police are justified in retaining them. Returning the vehicles would defeat the statutory purpose of preventing the use and possession of tampered vehicles. The application for the return of the veh…

Source excerpt

• Criminal Procedure Act Section 20
• National Road Traffic Act Section 68
• Rei Vindicatio
• Forensic Vehicle Investigation
• Money Laundering
• Forgery And Uttering

Bukari v S (A127/2023)

Bukari v S (A127/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 447 (9 May 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A127/2023

Judges

Dosio, Kuny

The appeal court found that the trial court failed to perform a comparative assessment of similar cases and did not adequately consider the mitigating factors presented by the appellant. While the offences were serious and involved substantial financial loss to SARS, the appellant was a first offender, pleaded guilty, and offered to make restitution. The court distinguished the present case from others involving greater pecuniary loss and more aggravated circumstances. The sentence of twelve years' imprisonment was found to be disturbingly inappropriate and too severe in the circumstances. Th…

Source excerpt

• Fraud
• Vat Refund Fraud
• Sentencing Principles
• Mitigation Of Sentence
• Correctional Supervision
• Forgery And Uttering

Pretoria Society of Advocates v Van Zyl (517/18)

Pretoria Society of Advocates v Van Zyl (517/18) [2019] ZASCA 13 (14 March 2019)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

517/18

Judges

Ponnan, Majiedt, Wallis, Swain, Schippers

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that an advocate who stole colleagues’ funds, perjured herself, and forged bank statements was not fit to practise.

• Removal From Roll
• Professional Misconduct
• Theft
• Perjury
• Forgery And Uttering
• Professional-misconduct

Hattingh v S (A307/2015)

Hattingh v S (A307/2015) [2016] ZAWCHC 199 (28 October 2016)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A307/2015

Judges

Parker, Gamble

The appeal was upheld because the Regional Magistrate materially misdirected himself in his assessment of the evidence and application of the law. The conviction of the appellant was based on speculation and conjecture rather than proven facts. The circumstantial evidence did not exclude every reasonable inference other than guilt, and there was no reliable evidence that the appellant acted with criminal intent, formed a common purpose with accused 1, or was an accessory after the fact. The appellant's failure to testify did not relieve the State of its burden to prove guilt beyond reasonable…

Source excerpt

• Fraud
• Forgery And Uttering
• Theft
• Circumstantial Evidence
• Common Purpose
• Accessory After The Fact

Piater v S (743/13)

Piater v S (743/13) [2014] ZASCA 134 (25 September 2014)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

743/13

Judges

Shongwe, Theron, Zondi

Appeal against a reduced sentence for fraud, forgery, uttering and theft dismissed. The Supreme Court of Appeal found no material misdirection and upheld 4 years’ imprisonment.

• Fraud
• Forgery And Uttering
• Theft
• Sentencing Principles
• Mitigation Of Sentence
• Criminal-sentencing

Motau v Minister of Safety and Security and Others (30024/05)

Motau v Minister of Safety and Security and Others (30024/05) [2012] ZAGPPHC 73 (30 April 2012)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

30024/05

Judge

PZ Ebersohn

The High Court found the plaintiff was unlawfully assaulted by police, causing serious injury and blindness in one eye, and awarded punitive costs.

• Police Brutality
• Assault By State Officials
• Vicarious Liability
• Punitive Costs
• Forgery And Uttering
• Condonation Application

Law Society of the Cape of Good Hope v Forbes (1419/2005)

Law Society of the Cape of Good Hope v Forbes (1419/2005) [2005] ZANCHC 106 (27 October 2005)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1419/2005

Judges

SA Majiedt, BC Molwantwa

The High Court struck an attorney from the roll after finding serious dishonesty, a forged divorce order, and misleading conduct toward a client.

• Attorneys Act Striking Off
• Professional Misconduct
• Forgery And Uttering
• Fiduciary Duties
• Disciplinary Proceedings
• Attorneys-act-striking-off

S v Sadler (57/99)

S v Sadler (57/99) [2000] ZASCA 13; [2000] 2 All SA 121 (A); (28 March 2000)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

57/99

Judges

Marais, Scott, Mthiyane

Appeal against sentence in a corruption and fraud case. The Supreme Court of Appeal substituted four years’ imprisonment for several counts and left other penalties intact.

• Corruption Act 1958
• Corruption Act 1992
• Fraud
• Forgery And Uttering
• Sentencing Principles
• Sentencing-appeal

S v Schwegmann (117/89)

S v Schwegmann (117/89) [1989] ZASCA 116 (26 September 1989)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

117/89

Judges

Hefer, Vivier, Nicholas

Appeal against sentence for fraud and uttering dismissed. The court held there was no misdirection in the magistrate’s treatment of alcoholism evidence or expert testimony.

• Fraud
• Forgery And Uttering
• Sentencing Discretion
• Diminished Responsibility
• Expert Evidence
• Alcohol Dependence