Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Criminal Law [2022] ZASCA 21

Manyaka v S (434/2020)

Manyaka v S (434/2020) [2022] ZASCA 21; 2022 (1) SACR 447 (SCA) (23 February 2022)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
434/2020
Judges
Mocumie, Schippers, Carelse, Mabindla-Boqwana, Phatshoane

The majority held that the applicant was not responsible for the delay in serving his sentence, as he complied with the directive to present himself to the correctional centre and remained available. The State failed to explain the extraordinary delay. The High Court increased the applicant's sentence without notice, constituting a material misdirection. Given the exceptional circumstances, including the applicant's crime-free conduct over 15 years, his personal rehabilitation, and the interests of justice, correctional supervision was deemed the most appropriate sentence. However, as no prob…

Source excerpt

  • Culpable Homicide
  • Sentencing Irregularity
  • Correctional Supervision
  • Admission Of Further Evidence
  • Condonation
  • Notice Of Increased Sentence
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2013] ZACC 17

Nabolisa v S (CCT 105/12)

Nabolisa v S (CCT 105/12) [2013] ZACC 17; 2013 (2) SACR 221 (CC); 2013 (8) BCLR 964 (CC) (12 June 2013)

Court
Constitutional Court
Case number
CCT 105/12
Judges
Skweyiya, Moseneke, Van der Westhuizen, Jafta, Mogoeng, Froneman, Khampepe, Mhlantla, Nkabinde, Zondo

The Constitutional Court, in a split decision, addressed whether the State must formally cross-appeal to seek an increase in sentence when the accused has appealed. The majority (Skweyiya J) held that section 316B of the Criminal Procedure Act does not require a formal cross-appeal by the State in such circumstances; the issue of sentence is already before the appellate court, and the State's notice in its Heads of Argument sufficed to alert the applicant to the risk of an increased sentence. The applicant was adequately notified and had the opportunity to argue against an increase, and no ir…

Source excerpt

  • Criminal Appeal Procedure
  • Cross Appeal Requirements
  • Fair Trial Rights
  • Minimum Sentencing Legislation
  • Notice Of Increased Sentence
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.