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
S v Buxeka (R82/2021) [2021] ZAFSHC 255 (28 October 2021)
On special review, the High Court set aside a conviction, sentence and firearm-disqualification order after finding multiple procedural irregularities in an unrepresented guilty plea.
S v Lipharawia (23/2015, 08/2015) [2015] ZALMPTHC 3 (20 August 2015)
On automatic review, the High Court set aside a conviction and sentence after finding the magistrate’s section 112(1)(b) questioning was inadequate and leading.
S v Mxhaka (191/2014) [2015] ZAFSHC 31 (9 February 2015)
Automatic review of a guilty plea for drunk driving failed because the magistrate relied on leading questions and did not properly test the factual basis or the fine enquiry.
Munyai v S (A598/12) [2013] ZAGPPHC 153 (12 June 2013)
High Court appeal set aside a rape conviction after finding the child complainant’s competency enquiry was inadequate and her evidence unreliable.
S v Modisapudi (HC . 03/2013) [2013] ZANWHC 28 (22 March 2013)
The High Court set aside a conviction and sentence after finding that the magistrate’s section 112(1)(b) guilty plea inquiry relied on leading questions.
S v Molefe, S v Mothudi, S v Matunda; S v Motona (90/08, B115/08, A207/08, B147/08, P300/08) [2009] ZANWHC 6 (19 March 2009)
The High Court set aside four guilty-plea convictions after finding the section 112(1)(b) inquiries were inadequate, leading, and legally insufficient.
S v Adendorff (344/03) [2004] ZASCA 42; [2004] 3 All SA 645 (SCA); 2004 (2) SACR 185 (SCA) (25 May 2004)
The Supreme Court of Appeal found that, after excluding inadmissible documentary evidence (exhibit B), the remaining evidence, particularly the corroborated testimony of Squire and Bester, established the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The appellant's version was riddled with improbabilities, including his alleged ignorance of vehicle registration procedures, lack of receipts for substantial cash transactions, and failure to verify the seller's right to dispose of the vehicle. The court held that the appellant's conduct was consistent only with knowledge that the car was stolen, a…
Source excerpt
Explore more
