South Africa Case Law

S v Njova and Others (43/2016)

S v Njova and Others (43/2016) [2019] ZAECMHC 45 (23 August 2019)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

43/2016

Judge

Jolwana

The court found that the accused committed a series of violent armed robberies and murders, targeting vulnerable rural shop owners and communities. The offences were executed with extreme violence and disregard for human life. The personal circumstances of the accused, including their status as first offenders and lengthy pre-sentence incarceration, were considered but found insufficient to constitute substantial and compelling circumstances for the robbery charges. However, for the murder charges, the court distinguished the roles of the accused, noting that the actual killings were perpetra…

Source excerpt

• Sentencing Principles
• Minimum Sentences
• Multiple Offences
• Mitigating Factors
• Pre Sentence Incarceration
• Armed Robbery

M v S (A294/2015)

M v S (A294/2015) [2015] ZAGPPHC 964 (6 November 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A294/2015

Judges

Riley, Hlophe

Appeal against sentence in a child-rape case upheld only to the extent that the two counts were taken together; life imprisonment remained.

• Minimum Sentence Act
• Rape Of Minor
• Sentencing Discretion
• Multiple Offences
• Substantial And Compelling Circumstances
• Minimum-sentence-act

S v Oberholzer

S v Oberholzer [2004] ZAFSHC 26 (22 April 2004)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A327/2003

Judges

Cillié, R, Hattingh, R

The appeal succeeded because the trial court misdirected itself by relying on the Congela case, which was materially different from the present matter. The appellant was a minor, pleaded guilty, cooperated fully with the police, and facilitated the recovery of most stolen goods. The original sentences were excessive and disproportionate to the appellant's personal circumstances and the facts of the case. The High Court held that the sentences should be set aside and replaced with a more appropriate sentence: five years' imprisonment under section 276(1)(i) of Act 51 of 1977 for counts 1 to 16…

Source excerpt

• Sentencing Principles
• Multiple Offences
• Juvenile Offender
• Correctional Supervision
• Minimum Sentences
• Suspended Sentence

S v Swart (247/99)

S v Swart (247/99) [2000] ZASCA 185 (29 September 2000)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

247/99

Judges

Nienaber, Marais, Mpati

The Supreme Court of Appeal increased the respondent’s sentence for rape and related offences, finding the trial court’s sentence glaringly inadequate.

• Rape
• Sentencing Principles
• Multiple Offences
• Mitigating Factors
• Previous Convictions
• Judicial Discretion