Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Molautsi v S (A164/2010) [2011] ZAFSHC 178 (24 November 2011)
The court upheld an appeal against sentence, finding the magistrate failed to properly weigh the appellant’s youth, remorse, substance abuse, and other mitigating factors.
Centre for Child Law v Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development and Others (CCT98/08) [2009] ZACC 18; 2009 (2) SACR 477 (CC) ; 2009 (6) SA 632 (CC) ; 2009 (11) BCLR 1105 (CC) (15 July 2009)
The majority of the Constitutional Court held that the application of minimum sentencing provisions to offenders aged 16 and 17 years old is inconsistent with section 28(1)(g) and 28(2) of the Constitution. The impugned provisions remove the constitutionally mandated distinction between children and adults, impose harsher sentences, and undermine the principles of imprisonment as a last resort and for the shortest appropriate period. The Minister failed to provide sufficient justification for this limitation under section 36. The Court declared the relevant sections of the Criminal Law Amendm…
Source excerpt
Centre for Child Law v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Developement and Others (11214/08) [2008] ZAGPHC 341 (4 November 2008)
The court found that the amended Criminal Law Amendment Act, by applying minimum sentencing to 16 and 17 year olds, negates the constitutional principles of juvenile sentencing, specifically the clean slate principle and the requirement that detention be a last resort and for the shortest appropriate period. The deletion of section 51(3)(b) removed judicial discretion, compelling courts to start with the minimum sentence for juveniles, which is inconsistent with section 28(1)(g) and 28(2) of the Constitution. The retrospective application of the amended Act further infringes the rule of law a…
Source excerpt
S v Williams and Others (CCT20/94) [1995] ZACC 6; 1995 (3) SA 632 ; 1995 (7) BCLR 861 (CC) (9 June 1995)
Section 294 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which authorises juvenile whipping, violates sections 10 and 11(2) of the Constitution by subjecting juveniles to cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment. The deliberate infliction of physical pain by the State, regardless of age, is incompatible with respect for human dignity and cannot be justified by resource constraints, deterrence, or retribution. The limitation imposed by section 294 is not reasonable, justifiable, or necessary in an open and democratic society. There are sufficient alternative sentencing options available, and the practice of…
Source excerpt
Explore more
