Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Criminal Law [2021] ZAECGHC 108

Moyakhe v S (CA&R15/2021)

Moyakhe v S (CA&R15/2021) [2021] ZAECGHC 108 (25 November 2021)

Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Case number
CA&R15/2021
Judges
M Beneke, S Rugunanan

The High Court found that the trial court failed to properly question the appellant on the nature and extent of the injuries suffered by the complainant prior to conviction, as required to activate the minimum sentence provisions under section 51(1) of Act 105 of 1997. The appellant's written statement and plea did not admit the factual basis for grievous bodily harm, and the medical evidence was only submitted after conviction. This procedural irregularity amounted to a failure of justice, as the facts activating the minimum sentence were not proved beyond a reasonable doubt prior to convict…

Source excerpt

  • Minimum Sentence Provisions
  • Section 112 Procedure
  • Rape
  • Judicial Questioning
  • Conviction Irregularity
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2019] ZAFSHC 153

S v Fredericks (293/2018)

S v Fredericks (293/2018) [2019] ZAFSHC 153 (5 September 2019)

Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
293/2018
Judges
L.B.J. Moeng, P.E. Molitsoane

The magistrate failed to properly question the accused in terms of section 112(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The questioning was leading and did not elicit the factual basis for the accused's plea of guilty. The accused was not given an opportunity to explain the circumstances, and the magistrate did not ascertain whether the accused admitted all the factual allegations necessary for conviction. Furthermore, the State did not prove that the speed measuring device was reliable, properly set up, and operated by a trained person, as required by law. The magistrate's concession that the re…

Source excerpt

  • Criminal Procedure Act Section 112
  • Automatic Review
  • Speeding Offence
  • Judicial Questioning
  • Conviction And Sentence
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2013] ZAFSHC 1

S v Maroeli and Another (338/12)

S v Maroeli and Another (338/12) [2013] ZAFSHC 1 (17 January 2013)

Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
338/12
Judges
Rampai, Lekale

The review court found that the trial magistrate's excessive and leading questioning of accused 2 went beyond the permissible boundaries set by section 112(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. This irregularity resulted in admissions that exposed accused 2 to a more serious charge than he intended to plead to, undermining both the fairness of the trial and public policy. The conviction for possession of cannabis was not rationally connected to the facts, and the prosecutor did not accept the plea, further tainting the process. The court set aside the conviction and sentence for possession of can…

Source excerpt

  • Judicial Questioning
  • Irregularity In Proceedings
  • Possession Of Cannabis
  • Illegal Immigration
  • Public Policy Review
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.