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
South African Police Services v Moyo and Another (C414/2021) [2025] ZALCCT 59 (2 July 2025)
The Labour Court dismissed SAPS’s unopposed review and condonation application, finding no unreasonable delay and no basis to interfere with the disciplinary sanction.
S v Nuwegeld (Review) (383.24) [2025] ZAWCHC 236 (28 May 2025)
The High Court confirmed convictions for housebreaking and theft, but set aside a nine-year sentence as disproportionate and replaced it with four years and six months.
Mfalapitsa v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others (2023/060969) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1136; 2025 (1) SACR 482 (GJ) (11 November 2024)
Review dismissed in an amnesty case arising from the COSAS Four murders; the court held the refusal of amnesty was reasonable and the killings were disproportionate to any political objective.
Taylor v S (CA&R: 14/2024) [2024] ZAECMKHC 86 (12 August 2024)
The High Court upheld an appeal against sentence for six fraud convictions, finding the effective six-year term disproportionate and reducing it to 18 months.
Nyalenda v S (CA 71/2019) [2024] ZANWHC 117 (16 April 2024)
The appeal court found that the trial court properly considered all relevant evidence and personal circumstances of the appellant, including his intoxication, previous convictions, age, and time spent in custody. The trial court correctly applied the statutory framework for minimum sentencing, noting that the appellant raped the complainant multiple times over several days, which triggers the prescribed sentence of life imprisonment under section 51(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. The factors advanced by the appellant, such as lack of serious physical injury and personal circumstances,…
Source excerpt
S v Mosito (11/2024; RE655/2023) [2024] ZANWHC 88; 2024 (2) SACR 96 (NWM) (26 March 2024)
High Court review of a three-year theft sentence replaced it with a partially suspended term and rehabilitation conditions, emphasising proportionality and rehabilitation.
Aden v S (A68-2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1 (22 February 2024)
The High Court dismissed a criminal appeal against a life sentence for murder, holding that no misdirection or substantial and compelling circumstances justified interference.
Mhlanga v S (A231/2021) [2023] ZAGPPHC 2027 (12 December 2023)
The appeal court found that the trial court misdirected itself by imposing a sentence that was shockingly disproportionate to the offences committed, failing to adequately consider the appellant's remorse, guilty plea, and personal circumstances. The refusal to allow a correctional supervision report further deprived the court of relevant information for sentencing. The effective sentence of 15 years' imprisonment was excessive given the amounts involved and the absence of aggravating factors such as previous convictions or theft from the public purse. The appeal court held that direct impris…
Source excerpt
Nu Africa Duty Free Shops (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (25788/2022) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1855 (27 October 2023)
The court found that the Applicant, as exporter and clearing agent, was statutorily liable for the goods until export was proven. The Customs and Excise Act contains deeming provisions that place liability on the exporter if goods are not exported and proof is not provided. The Respondent acted within its statutory powers by imposing the forfeiture penalty when the Applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence of export. The court held that the administrative action was lawful, rational, and reasonable under PAJA, and that the penalty was not disproportionate given the statutory framework.…
Source excerpt
S v Mokoena [2023] ZAGPPHC 208; A92/2022 (20 March 2023)
The court found that the trial court misdirected itself by failing to properly individualise the appellant and to consider all mitigating factors cumulatively. The probation officer's report was inadequate, lacking comprehensive information about the appellant's background, character, and remorse. The trial court relied on aggravating evidence from the victim without affording the appellant an opportunity to respond to inconsistencies. The appellant's young age, first offender status, guilty plea, cooperation, and demonstrated remorse through mediation were not given sufficient weight. The ef…
Source excerpt
Explore more
