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
Ndlovu and Another v S (761/22 ; BA11/2022) [2022] ZAMPMHC 10 (26 August 2022)
High Court appeal against refusal of bail in a schedule 6 murder case dismissed because the appellants failed to prove exceptional circumstances.
Louw v S (A327/2009) [2018] ZAGPJHC 23 (15 February 2018)
The High Court set aside a prison sentence and remitted the matter for fresh sentencing to correctional supervision after finding the trial court failed to consider it properly.
Linus v S (A107/2014) [2014] ZAGPPHC 661; 2015 (1) SACR 381 (GP) (28 August 2014)
The High Court dismissed an appeal against a 10-year sentence for dealing in drugs, holding the magistrate properly weighed the seriousness of the offence and the need for deterrence.
S v Ramaotsa (A182/2014) [2014] ZAGPPHC 333 (27 March 2014)
The High Court confirmed a magistrate’s conviction and sentence for drug possession, holding that the R1,200 fine was competent under section 112(1)(a).
Kammies v S (CA&R 98/10) [2011] ZANCHC 11 (1 July 2011)
The appellate court found that the trial court misdirected itself by failing to consider the established norms for fines in drunk driving cases and by combining the two charges for sentencing purposes. The sentence imposed was substantially harsher than the norm and did not adequately reflect the appellant's personal circumstances, particularly his financial position and lack of previous convictions. The court held that each charge should have been considered separately and that the trial court underemphasized the mitigating factors. Consequently, the appellate court set aside the original se…
Source excerpt
S v Modau and Another (3/2003) [2003] ZANWHC 4 (30 January 2003)
The court found that the sentence imposed on accused no. 2 was disproportionately severe given the nature of her conduct, which involved a single slap, and accepted the magistrate's suggestion to reduce the sentence. The sentence for accused no. 1, who stabbed the complainant with a broken bottle, was deemed appropriate in light of his personal circumstances and the impact of the fine on his livelihood. The court confirmed both convictions but substituted the sentence for accused no. 2 with a lesser sentence that better reflected the gravity of her offence and her circumstances.
Source excerpt
S v Slabbert (286/97) [1998] ZASCA 2 (3 March 1998)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the composite sentence imposed by the magistrate, consisting of five years imprisonment under section 276(1)(i) and an additional two years imprisonment wholly suspended for five years, was incompetent. The court reasoned that a suspended sentence of imprisonment is still a sentence of imprisonment and must be included in the total period for the purposes of section 276A(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act. Therefore, the total sentence amounted to seven years, exceeding the statutory maximum of five years permitted under section 276(1)(i). The magistrate mi…
Source excerpt
S v Molotsi (449/82) [1984] ZASCA 86 (3 September 1984)
The court upheld an appeal against sentence for two shoplifting convictions, finding the magistrate overemphasized deterrence and insufficiently investigated the appellant’s personal circumstances.
Explore more
