South Africa Case Law

S v Majikijela (15242/2015, B517/2014,)

S v Majikijela (15242/2015, B517/2014,) [2015] ZAWCHC 143 (9 October 2015)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

15242/2015

Judges

A.G. Binns-Ward, L.J Bozalek

The evidence did not prove theft beyond reasonable doubt, nor did it establish that the accused knew the goods were stolen. However, the accused was found in possession of goods, including cash, in circumstances giving rise to reasonable suspicion of theft and failed to provide a satisfactory account of such possession. Section 36 of the General Law Amendment Act creates an offence for such conduct and is a competent verdict on a charge of theft under section 264(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The failure to alert the accused to the possibility of a competent verdict does not bar substi…

Source excerpt

• Theft
• Competent Verdict
• Possession Of Suspected Stolen Goods
• General Law Amendment Act Section 36
• Criminal Procedure Act Section 264
• Interpretation Of Goods

Furlong v S (064/11)

Furlong v S (064/11) [2011] ZASCA 103; 2012 (2) SACR 620 (SCA) (1 June 2011)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

064/11

Judges

NAVSA, SERITI, PETSE

The Supreme Court of Appeal reduced a sentence after finding the magistrate punished the accused for robbery and theft, not the offence charged.

• Sentence Appeal
• General Law Amendment Act Section 36
• Misdirection In Sentencing
• Possession Of Suspected Stolen Goods
• Sentence-appeal
• Misdirection-in-sentencing