South Africa Case Law

S v Hasane and Others (K/S 01/2017)

S v Hasane and Others (K/S 01/2017) [2020] ZANCHC 28 (12 May 2020)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

K/S 01/2017

Judge

Tlaletsi JP

The court found that the State presented compelling evidence, including forensic findings, cell phone records, and CCTV footage, which established the accused's involvement in the murder, kidnapping, and contraventions of the Firearms Control Act. The evidence demonstrated that the accused acted in concert and shared a common purpose to commit the offences. The court rejected the accused's explanations and found that contradictions in witness statements were immaterial to the central issues. The identification procedures were found to be reliable, and the evidentiary chain was intact. The cou…

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Kidnapping
• Firearms Control Act
• Criminal Procedure
• Joint Enterprise
• Evidentiary Principles

Ndaba v S (A895/2015)

Ndaba v S (A895/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 484 (9 March 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A895/2015

Judges

SP Mothle, W Sibuyi

The High Court dismissed an appeal against convictions for robbery with aggravating circumstances and murder arising from a tuck-shop robbery.

• Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances
• Accomplice Liability
• Murder
• Joint Enterprise
• Causation In Criminal Law
• Robbery-with-aggravating-circumstances

Matali and Others v S (A338/2010)

Matali and Others v S (A338/2010) [2012] ZAFSHC 156 (30 August 2012)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A338/2010

Judges

Van der Merwe, R, Jordaan, R, Molefe, WND R

The Free State High Court dismissed three appellants’ challenges to convictions for housebreaking, robbery and murder, finding joint participation and dolus eventualis.

• Housebreaking With Intent To Robbery
• Robbery
• Murder
• Dolus Eventualis
• Joint Enterprise
• Appeal Against Conviction

S v Zungu and Another (CA 117/2003)

S v Zungu and Another (CA 117/2003) [2003] ZANWHC 68 (11 November 2003)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

CA 117/2003

Judges

MTR Mogoeng, AA Landman

The High Court dismissed Lucky Zungu’s appeal, but upheld Prince Magule’s appeal because the evidence did not support his conviction for the complainant’s robbery.

• Robbery With Aggravating Circumstances
• Credibility Of Witnesses
• Joint Enterprise
• Firearm Possession
• Appeal Procedure
• Criminal-law

S v Ndhlovu and Others (327/01)

S v Ndhlovu and Others (327/01) [2002] ZASCA 70; [2002] 3 All SA 760 (SCA); 2002 (6) SA 305 (SCA); 2002 (2) SACR 325 (SCA) (31 May 2002)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

327/01

Judges

Harms, Cameron, Heher

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that section 3 of the Law of Evidence Amendment Act 45 of 1988 is not unconstitutional and provides a constitutionally sound framework for the admission of hearsay evidence in criminal trials. The Court found that the trial judge correctly admitted the out-of-court statements of accused 3 and 4 against their co-accused, as the interests of justice justified their admission. The statements were reliable, corroborated by other evidence, and there was no motive for fabrication. The procedural safeguards required by the Act and the Constitution were observed, and…

Source excerpt

• Hearsay Evidence
• Law Of Evidence Amendment Act
• Constitutional Right To Fair Trial
• Admissibility Of Statements
• Joint Enterprise
• Minimum Sentences

S v Kgwadi (168/94)

S v Kgwadi (168/94) [1997] ZASCA 17 (20 March 1997)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

168/94

Judges

Vivier, F H Grosskopf, Streicher

The appeal against conviction for murder was dismissed, but the death sentence was set aside after Makwanyane. The matter was remitted for re-sentencing.

• Admissibility Of Confession
• Dolus Eventualis
• Death Penalty
• Appeal Procedure
• Joint Enterprise
• Criminal-law

S v Du Plooy (123/96)

S v Du Plooy (123/96) [1996] ZASCA 124 (7 November 1996)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

123/96

Judges

Vivier, Nienaber, Harms

The court upheld the identification evidence, rejected the alibi, but substituted attempted murder for murder because the appellant joined after the fatal shot.

• Attempted Murder
• Joint Enterprise
• Identification Evidence
• Gang Related Offences
• Attempted-murder
• Identification-evidence

S v Mofokeng en Andere (99/94)

S v Mofokeng en Andere (99/94) [1994] ZASCA 188 (30 November 1994)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

99/94

Judges

Botha, Kumleben, Nicholas

The court upheld murder convictions of four appellants and postponed the sentence appeal pending Constitutional Court review of the death penalty.

• Murder
• Joint Enterprise
• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Sentencing
• Death Penalty
• Appeal Procedure

S v Herholdt (407/1991)

S v Herholdt (407/1991) [1993] ZASCA 171 (15 November 1993)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

407/1991

Judges

Van Heerden, Nienaber, Van den Heever

The court found that the appellant's version of events was not credible and was contradicted by the probabilities and the evidence presented. The appellant's failure to report the incident, her repeated false statements to the police, and her conduct after the murder were inconsistent with innocence. The court concluded that the only reasonable inference was that the appellant was a party to a conspiracy to murder the deceased. The appeal against conviction was dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Conspiracy
• Credibility Of Witnesses
• Joint Enterprise
• Assessment Of Evidence

S v Chauke (544/92)

S v Chauke (544/92) [1993] ZASCA 64 (21 May 1993)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

544/92

Judges

Van Heerden, Nienaber, Harms

Death sentence set aside and replaced with life imprisonment in an appeal involving murder, alleged ritual killing, and disputed evidence of the appellant’s role.

• Murder
• Sentencing
• Mitigating Factors
• Ritual Murder Allegation
• Joint Enterprise
• Dolus Directus