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
J.S.H v M.S.H (8470/2021) [2023] ZAWCHC 346 (18 July 2023)
The High Court found the respondent in contempt for failing to comply with a Rule 43 maintenance order, rejected his financial inability defence, and imposed sanctions.
Filander v S (A430/2010) [2010] ZAWCHC 493 (15 October 2010)
The High Court upheld an appeal against conviction because the appellant had been convicted under a repealed firearms provision, and the evidence did not justify the negligence finding.
S v Visser (361/2003) [2003] ZASCA 148; [2004] 1 All SA 605 (SCA); 2004 (1) SACR 393 (SCA) (1 December 2003)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the magistrate's recommendation to reduce the period of periodical imprisonment based on arrear maintenance payments was not legally permissible, as no statutory provision authorizes such a reduction for maintenance defaulters. The sentence imposed must be reformulated. The court found that a wholly suspended sentence would fail to serve the purposes of punishment and deterrence, especially given the appellant's deliberate and recalcitrant conduct. The appellant's financial position and conduct justified a partially suspended sentence, with clear conditio…
Source excerpt
S v Lister (447/91) [1993] ZASCA 82; [1993] 4 All SA 669 (A) (28 May 1993)
The court upheld a 4-year prison sentence for a repeated theft and fraud offender, finding the sentence was not excessive despite psychiatric and personal mitigation.
S v Jacobs (443/84) [1986] ZASCA 61; [1986] 2 All SA 477 (A) (28 May 1986)
The court held that the magistrate erred by not considering periodical imprisonment as an alternative to direct imprisonment, despite the seriousness of the offence and the appellant's previous convictions. The appellant's personal circumstances, including his employment and family responsibilities, made periodical imprisonment a more suitable sentence. The court found that a lengthy period of periodical imprisonment would serve the interests of justice by punishing the offender, deterring future offences, and allowing him to continue supporting his family. The sentence of 18 months' imprison…
Source excerpt
Explore more
