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
Msindo v S (CAP 09/2025 ; CA 74/2018) [2025] ZANWHC 30 (10 February 2025)
The High Court dismissed a petition for leave to appeal against sentence, finding no reasonable prospects of success, while condemning long administrative delay in processing the matter.
Mogabale v S (CA 44/2023 ; CAP 04/2025) [2025] ZANWHC 27 (23 January 2025)
Petition against sentence for attempted murder dismissed for lack of reasonable prospects of success. The court also condemned serious delays and registrar oversight failures.
Motlhabane v S (CA 17/2018 ; CAP 10/2025) [2025] ZANWHC 29 (23 January 2025)
The High Court dismissed a petition for leave to appeal against a 15-year murder sentence, finding no reasonable prospects of success, and referred registry failures for investigation.
Mathuthu and Others v S (393/2021) [2024] ZASCA 50 (17 April 2024)
The Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed leave to appeal on conviction, but granted leave on sentence and remitted the sentence issue to the High Court.
Llale v S (663/2016) [2017] ZASCA 49 (26 April 2017)
The Supreme Court of Appeal granted Llale leave to appeal against conviction and sentence, finding reasonable prospects of success and special circumstances.
Qhinga and Others v S (CCT 50/10) [2011] ZACC 18; 2011 (9) BCLR 980 (CC); 2011 (2) SACR 378 (CC) (25 May 2011)
The Constitutional Court held that the Supreme Court of Appeal failed to meet the constitutional standard of fairness required by section 35(3)(o) of the Constitution when it refused the applicants' petition for leave to appeal without considering the relevant portions of the record, specifically the rulings and reasons from the trials-within-the-trial. The absence of these reasons prevented an adequate reappraisal of the case and an informed decision, thereby infringing the applicants' right of appeal or review by a higher court. The Court found that the only just and equitable remedy was to…
Source excerpt
Gardiner v S (A243/09) [2009] ZAGPJHC 48 (10 September 2009)
The Full Bench held that Willis J was not competent to grant leave to appeal to the Full Bench against conviction after the petition procedure under section 309C of the Criminal Procedure Act had been exhausted. The correct procedure, as established by statute and case law, is to petition the President of the Supreme Court of Appeal for leave to appeal. The order granting leave to appeal was therefore a nullity and did not confer jurisdiction on the Full Bench to hear the appeal. As a result, there was no proper appeal before the court, and the matter had to be struck off the roll.
Source excerpt
Stallenberg v S (RC 37/04) [2009] ZANCHC 25 (8 May 2009)
The court held that it was functus officio in relation to the conviction, as leave to appeal had been granted only in respect of sentence. The Vilakazi precedent was distinguishable because, in that case, the record was not before the petition court, whereas in the present matter, the full record and judgment were available and considered when leave was granted. There is no statutory provision or inherent jurisdiction allowing the High Court to consider conviction where leave to appeal was not granted for that aspect. The appellant's remedy lies in petitioning the Supreme Court of Appeal. Sin…
Source excerpt
S v Matshona (509/2007) [2008] ZASCA 58; [2008] 4 All SA 68 (SCA); 2013 (2) SACR 126 (SCA) (28 May 2008)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that its jurisdiction in this matter was limited to determining whether the high court should have granted leave to appeal against the sentence imposed by the regional court. The merits of the sentence appeal itself were not before the SCA, as the appeal had not yet been heard in the high court. The court found that there were reasonable prospects that a court of appeal might consider the sentence too severe, given the appellant's personal circumstances, the nature of the offence, and the consequences suffered. The respondent conceded this point. Accordingly,…
Source excerpt
S v O'Connell and Others (P15/2005, P71/2005, P34/2006, P65/2006) [2006] ZAWCHC 63; [2007] 2 All SA 293 (C); 2007 (5) BCLR 556 (C) (6 November 2006)
The court held that sections 309B and 309C of the Criminal Procedure Act, as amended in 2004, are inconsistent with the Constitution. The procedure for leave to appeal unduly restricts the right of access to courts and a fair trial, particularly for unrepresented accused. The consideration of petitions by a single judge and the lack of guaranteed access to the full record undermine the adequacy of reappraisal and informed decision-making. The court found that these defects are fundamental and cannot be justified by resource constraints or the need to screen unmeritorious appeals. Accordingly,…
Source excerpt
Explore more
