South Africa Case Law

S v Chitiyo and Others (CC77/2019)

S v Chitiyo and Others (CC77/2019) [2022] ZAECMKHC 69 (30 September 2022)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

CC77/2019

Judge

Bloem

The court found that the accused acted in concert with a common purpose to poach rhinos and steal their horns, as evidenced by cellphone records, admissions, physical evidence, and similar fact evidence from prior incidents. The explanations offered by the accused were found to be improbable and false, particularly regarding the possession and concealment of the firearm and ammunition, and the alleged innocent purposes for their travel. The court admitted similar fact evidence, finding it both logically and legally relevant and its probative value outweighing any prejudicial effect. The court…

Source excerpt

• Conspiracy
• Unlawful Possession Of Firearm
• Unlawful Possession Of Ammunition
• Theft Of Rhino Horn
• National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act
• Firearms Control Act

Hume v Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation and Another (33593/20)

Hume v Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation and Another (33593/20) [2022] ZAGPPHC 33; 2022 (1) SACR 518 (GP) (28 January 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

33593/20

Judge

SK Hassim

High Court dismissed a claim for return of 181 rhino horns seized under the CPA, holding that section 34 governed their disposal and a court order was required.

• Rei Vindicatio
• Disposal Of Seized Property
• National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act
• Criminal Procedure Act Section 34
• Forfeiture Of Property
• Permit Requirements

Federation of South African Fly Fisheries v Minister of Environmental Affairs (62486/2018)

Federation of South African Fly Fisheries v Minister of Environmental Affairs (62486/2018) [2021] ZAGPPHC 575 (10 September 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

62486/2018

Judge

A Vorster

The court found that the Minister failed to comply with the peremptory content requirements of section 100(2)(b) of NEMBA when publishing the draft regulations and lists. The notices did not contain sufficient information to enable meaningful public participation, as they lacked rationale, details of changes, and the impact on rights and interests. Reference to additional documents on the Department's website did not satisfy the statutory requirement for the notice itself to contain sufficient information. The court held that public participation is a foundational constitutional value and tha…

Source excerpt

• Public Participation
• National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act
• Procedural Fairness
• Declaratory Relief

Hlungwane v S (BA 21/2019; RC121/2014)

Hlungwane v S (BA 21/2019; RC121/2014) [2020] ZALMPPHC 34 (4 June 2020)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

BA 21/2019

Judges

Makgoba, Gphatudi, Semenya

The High Court upheld an appeal against conviction for possession of rhino legs, finding the evidence did not prove joint possession or the required intent.

• Joint Possession
• Common Purpose
• Protected Species Offences
• Animus Possidendi
• National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act
• Limpopo Environmental Management Act

Landela and Another v The State (A04/2017)

Landela and Another v The State (A04/2017) [2017] ZAGPPHC 930 (30 November 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A04/2017

Judge

Legodi

The High Court upheld a bail appeal, finding the accused were not properly shown to face a Schedule 5 offence and granting bail on strict conditions.

• Bail Application
• Schedule 5 Offence
• National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act
• Theft
• Presumption Of Innocence
• Bail-application

S v Botha (135/2015(b))

S v Botha (135/2015(b)) [2015] ZAFSHC 194 (29 October 2015)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

135/2015(b)

Judges

M Opperman, C Van Zyl

The Free State High Court confirmed a conviction and sentence on review, but corrected the wording of a suspended fine imposed for an environmental offence.

• National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act
• Sentencing
• Suspended Sentence
• Review Procedure
• Criminal-review
• Suspended-sentence

Kloof Conservancy v Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others (12667/2012)

Kloof Conservancy v Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others (12667/2012) [2014] ZAKZDHC 60 (22 October 2014)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

12667/2012

Judge

Vahed

The court declared unlawful the long failure to publish invasive species lists and regulations under NEMBA, and made further compliance and costs orders.

• National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act
• Failure To Publish Regulations
• Mandamus
• Constitutional Environmental Rights
• Administrative Delay
• Costs Orders

Lemthongthai v S (849/2013)

Lemthongthai v S (849/2013) [2014] ZASCA 131; 2015 (1) SACR 353 (SCA) (25 September 2014)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

849/2013

Judges

Navsa, Wallis, Swain

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that both the regional court and the high court had misdirected themselves in the grouping and calculation of sentences, resulting in a sentence that was disproportionate and induced a sense of shock. The appellant's manipulation of the permit system and fraudulent conduct warranted a custodial sentence and a substantial fine, but the sentence imposed by the high court was excessive. The court held that the killing of 26 rhinos occurred during one operation and that the rhinos were surplus bulls destined for trophy hunting, distinguishing the case from conven…

Source excerpt

• Illegal Trade In Rhino Horn
• Biodiversity Conservation
• Sentencing Principles
• National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act
• Customs And Excise Act

SA Predator Breeders Association and Others v Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (72/10)

SA Predator Breeders Association and Others v Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (72/10) [2010] ZASCA 151; [2011] 2 All SA 529 (SCA) (29 November 2010)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

72/10

Judges

Heher, Snyders, Bosielo, Shongwe, R Pillay

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that regulation 24(2) was irrational insofar as it applied to captive-bred lions, but upheld the Scientific Authority rules.

• National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act
• Rationality Review
• Regulatory Consultation
• Hunting Of Captive Bred Lions
• Scientific Authority Composition
• Administrative-law