South Africa Case Law

Sibeko v S and Another (Appeal) (A839/2016)

Sibeko v S and Another (Appeal) (A839/2016) [2025] ZAGPPHC 407 (23 April 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A839/2016

Judges

Mncube, Mbongwe

The court found that the presumption in section 19(2) of the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act was not applicable to the facts, as the applicant did not admit to dealing but rather to possession for personal use. The trial court misdirected itself by relying on the presumption and failing to invoke section 113 of the Criminal Procedure Act to correct the plea to not guilty. The conviction for dealing was set aside and replaced with possession. The sentence imposed was found to be harsh due to the lack of concurrency, constituting a material misdirection. The appeal succeeded on both conviction a…

Source excerpt

• Drugs And Drug Trafficking Act
• Presumption Of Innocence
• Reverse Onus
• Plea Procedure
• Concurrent Sentences

Mokgetsi v S (Bail Appeal) (A34/2025)

Mokgetsi v S (Bail Appeal) (A34/2025) [2025] ZAGPPHC 355 (14 April 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A34/2025

Judge

PD. Phahlane

The High Court dismissed a bail appeal by an accused charged with rape, holding that the magistrate correctly applied the interests-of-justice test under the CPA.

• Bail Application
• Schedule 5 Offence
• Interests Of Justice
• Presumption Of Innocence
• Judicial Discretion
• Bail-application

Malambe v S (Bail Appeal) (BA 02/25)

Malambe v S (Bail Appeal) (BA 02/25) [2025] ZAMPMBHC 7 (4 March 2025)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

BA 02/25

Judge

Mangena

The court found that the appellant failed to establish exceptional circumstances justifying his release on bail for Schedule 6 offences. The magistrate correctly considered all relevant factors, including the seriousness of the offence, the appellant's relationship with witnesses, the likelihood of interference, and the prevalence of gender-based violence. The appellant's affidavit did not adequately address the circumstances of the offence or the possession of the unlicensed firearm. The risk of evasion and undermining the administration of justice outweighed the appellant's personal circums…

Source excerpt

• Bail Application
• Exceptional Circumstances
• Schedule 6 Offences
• Gender Based Violence
• Presumption Of Innocence

Jerry v S (A116/2024)

Jerry v S (A116/2024) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1147 (11 November 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A116/2024

Judge

Yacoob

High Court dismissed a bail appeal, finding the applicant failed to prove exceptional circumstances for release on a Schedule 6 charge.

• Bail Application
• Exceptional Circumstances
• Presumption Of Innocence
• Onus Of Proof
• Bail-appeal
• Exceptional-circumstances

Rosen v S (CA & R 38/24)

Rosen v S (CA & R 38/24) [2024] ZANCHC 101 (25 October 2024)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

CA & R 38/24

Judge

Nxumalo

The court found that the magistrate a quo materially misdirected himself by applying Schedule 6 instead of Schedule 5 to the appellant's bail application, thereby imposing an incorrect and higher threshold of 'exceptional circumstances' rather than the correct test of whether release is in the interests of justice. The appellant had previously complied with all bail conditions, including house arrest, and there was no evidence that he posed a flight risk, would interfere with witnesses, or commit further offences. The respondent failed to verify or refute the appellant's proposed address, and…

Source excerpt

• Bail Application
• Schedule 5 Offences
• Prevention Of Organised Crime Act
• Criminal Procedure Act
• Presumption Of Innocence

Mahlangu v S (A264/24)

Mahlangu v S (A264/24) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1086 (24 October 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A264/24

Judge

Lesufi

High Court appeal against refusal of bail in a Schedule 6 rape matter dismissed for failure to show exceptional circumstances.

• Bail Application
• Exceptional Circumstances
• Sexual Offences
• Presumption Of Innocence
• Interests Of Justice
• Bail-application

Shungube v S (BA06/2024)

Shungube v S (BA06/2024) [2024] ZAMPMBHC 73 (1 October 2024)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

BA06/2024

Judge

Mashile

High Court bail appeal upheld after finding the magistrate misapplied Schedule 6 and overestimated risks of intimidation, evidence interference, and community danger.

• Bail Application
• Schedule 5 Offences
• Interests Of Justice
• Witness Intimidation
• Flight Risk
• Presumption Of Innocence

M.T v S (A148/2024)

M.T v S (A148/2024) [2024] ZAFSHC 313 (20 September 2024)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A148/2024

Judge

Cronje, AJ

Bail appeal in a rape matter was remitted for urgent reconsideration after the court found the record and submissions were materially incomplete.

• Bail Application
• Rape Of Minor
• Domestic Violence
• Presumption Of Innocence
• Exceptional Circumstances
• Magistrates Court Procedure

P.M and Others v S (A59/2024)

P.M and Others v S (A59/2024) [2024] ZAGPJHC 875 (9 September 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A59/2024

Judge

M V Noko

The court held that the appellants failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances as required by section 60(11)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The impact of detention on health and education, while relevant, did not rise to the level of exceptional circumstances in this case, especially as the state provides services and any shortcomings should be addressed through administrative channels rather than bail. The seriousness of the charges and the legislative framework governing bail for schedule 6 offences justified continued detention. The court found no error in the reasoning or discretio…

Source excerpt

• Bail Application
• Exceptional Circumstances
• Children In Conflict With Law
• Right To Education
• Right To Health
• Presumption Of Innocence

Mathibela v S (CC146/2016)

Mathibela v S (CC146/2016) [2024] ZAGPPHC 849 (28 August 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

CC146/2016

Judge

M J Mosopa

The High Court refused leave to appeal against conviction, finding no reasonable prospects of success on the evidence, including admissions and cellphone data.

• Leave To Appeal
• Reasonable Prospect Of Success
• Common Purpose
• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Presumption Of Innocence
• Leave-to-appeal