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 M.D (Sentence) (CC013/2018) [2022] ZALMPTHC 2 (15 March 2022)
The High Court sentenced MD to 12 years’ imprisonment for rape of a mentally disabled complainant, finding substantial and compelling circumstances but rejecting genuine remorse.
S v M.D (CC13/2018) [2022] ZALMPTHC 1 (25 February 2022)
The High Court convicted the accused of rape, finding the complainant did not consent and that her moderate intellectual disability meant she could not give legal consent.
Pillay v S (A74/2021) [2021] ZAGPPHC 243 (22 April 2021)
High Court appeal against refusal of bail dismissed. The court held the matter fell under Schedule 6 and that the appellant failed to show exceptional circumstances.
J.P v S (A74/2021) [2021] ZAGPPHC 363 (22 April 2021)
Appeal against refusal of bail dismissed; the High Court held the Schedule 6 bail approach was correct and no exceptional circumstances were shown.
Pullen v S (CA&R3319/2013) [2019] ZAECGHC 78; 2019 (2) SACR 605 (ECG) (29 August 2019)
The High Court allowed an appeal against a rape conviction, finding the State failed to prove the complainant’s mental disability or the appellant’s knowledge of it.
Prins v S (A153/16) [2016] ZAWCHC 121; 2017 (1) SACR 20 (WCC) (19 September 2016)
Appeal against conviction for statutory rape dismissed. The High Court held that the complainant's mental disability meant she could not consent under SORMA.
Mahlaba v S (A109/2016) [2016] ZAFSHC 135 (19 August 2016)
High Court appeal dismissed against rape conviction and life sentence for raping a mentally disabled 14-year-old complainant.
Gwarubana v S (A 132/2015) [2015] ZAWCHC 114 (17 August 2015)
The court found that the appellant was legally represented and had access to the psychologist's report indicating the complainant's severe mental handicap. Although the charge sheet did not reference the minimum sentence legislation, the appellant and his legal representative were aware of the facts that triggered its application. The appellant's defence was an alibi, and he never sought to challenge the complainant's mental status or request a postponement to obtain contrary evidence. The court held that the procedural omissions did not impair the appellant's fair trial rights. On the merits…
Source excerpt
Mnguni v S (A12/2014) [2014] ZAGPPHC 528; 2014 (2) SACR 595 (GP) (2 June 2014)
The High Court set aside a conviction for rape of a mentally disabled person, but replaced it with rape and imposed the minimum 10-year sentence.
Roux SC N.O v Road Accident Fund and Another (17068/2009) [2014] ZAWCHC 64 (2 May 2014)
The court held that the Prescription Act applies to claims under the MMF Act unless ousted by an Act of Parliament. The relevant regulations do not have the status of an Act of Parliament and cannot override the Prescription Act. Article 57 of the Agreement under the MMF Act extends the prescription period to five years, but section 13(1)(a) of the Prescription Act delays completion of prescription for as long as the claimant is under curatorship. The appointment of a curator ad litem does not remove the impediment, and prescription only runs one year after curatorship ends. Since the patient…
Source excerpt
Explore more
