South Africa Case Law

S v Mrabule (Review) (HC16/2025)

S v Mrabule (Review) (HC16/2025) [2025] ZANWHC 72 (10 April 2025)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

HC16/2025

Judges

T Masike, A Reddy

The proceedings before Acting Magistrate Wallis were not in accordance with justice because the accused did not unequivocally admit that his ability to drive was impaired by alcohol consumption, which is an essential element of the offence of driving under the influence. The questioning in terms of section 112(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act was insufficient to establish all elements of the offence. As a result, the conviction and sentence must be set aside. The fine imposed, if paid, must be refunded to the accused, and the matter is referred to the National Prosecuting Authority to deci…

Source excerpt

• Drunken Driving
• Criminal Procedure Act Section 112 1 B
• Charge Particularity
• National Road Traffic Act Section 65
• Conviction And Sentence Setting Aside

S v Mthembu (374/17)

S v Mthembu (374/17) [2017] ZAGPPHC 1303 (18 December 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

374/17

Judges

M J Mosopa, N P Mngqibisa-Thusi

Automatic review of a guilty-plea conviction for drunken driving was successful because the magistrate’s section 112 questioning did not establish all elements of the offence.

• Drunken Driving
• Criminal Procedure Act Section 112
• National Road Traffic Act Section 65
• Conviction And Sentence Review
• Criminal-procedure
• Guilty-plea-review