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
S.M v S (CA&R: 27/2022) [2024] ZAECBHC 20 (16 July 2024)
High Court appeal against a life sentence for raping a 10-year-old child was dismissed. The court found no substantial and compelling circumstances.
Van Rooy v S (CA & R 57/2022) [2024] ZANCHC 50 (24 May 2024)
The court found that, although the appellant abused a position of trust and committed a serious offence against a minor, the circumstances did not warrant the imposition of a life sentence. The appellant was a first offender, relatively young, and there was no evidence of lasting physical injury or severe ongoing emotional harm to the complainant. The absence of a victim impact report and the lack of professional assessment of the emotional impact were noted. The court held that the prescribed life sentence would be disproportionate to the crime, the offender, and the legitimate needs of soci…
Source excerpt
Assegai v S (K/S 7/2020) [2023] ZANCHC 2 (20 January 2023)
The trial court failed to comply with the mandatory procedure under section 105A of the Criminal Procedure Act by convicting the appellant before considering the agreed sentence and by not affording the parties an opportunity to withdraw from the agreement when it intended to impose a different sentence. Both parties agreed that this constituted a fatal irregularity. The appellate court distinguished the present case from S v DJ, as the appellant had confirmed all requirements under section 105A(6)(a) and expressly wished to implement the plea and sentencing agreement. The court assessed whet…
Source excerpt
DPP, Pretoria v Zulu (1192/2018) [2021] ZASCA 174 (10 December 2021)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the high court erred in its approach to proportionality and the application of the prescribed minimum sentence regime. The high court found no substantial and compelling circumstances to justify deviation from life imprisonment, yet reduced the sentence based on a perceived lack of brutality compared to other cases. This was a material misdirection, as the facts—repeated rape of a minor over several years, resulting in multiple pregnancies and abortions—were sufficiently egregious to warrant the maximum penalty. The appellate court confirmed that the lega…
Source excerpt
Jansen v S (CA&R220/18) [2019] ZAECGHC 105; 2020 (1) SACR 413 (ECG) (29 October 2019)
The court found that the trial court's factual findings and credibility assessments were sound and not vitiated by any misdirection. The evidence established that the appellant was in possession of a semi-automatic firearm and ammunition, and his version was correctly rejected as false. The minimum sentencing regime under section 51(2) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act applies to convictions under the Firearms Control Act, as confirmed by Supreme Court of Appeal and Constitutional Court authority. The appellant's personal circumstances, including his age, employment, and time spent in custody…
Source excerpt
Wanga v S (A286/17) [2017] ZAWCHC 123 (3 November 2017)
The court held that while the trial magistrate's reasoning was flawed in certain respects, the sentence imposed was not materially misdirected nor shockingly inappropriate. The appellant's personal circumstances, including being a first offender, stable employment, and family responsibilities, were favourable but not sufficient to outweigh the gravity of the offence. The rape of an 8-year-old child, the degree of violence involved, and the severe emotional and psychological impact on the complainant justified a harsh sentence. The possibility of rehabilitation was acknowledged, but did not co…
Source excerpt
Stuurman v S (CA&R115/16) [2017] ZANCHC 62 (24 October 2017)
The court found that the trial court failed to accord sufficient weight to the appellant's personal circumstances, including his status as a first offender, the absence of serious physical injuries to the victim, and the potential for rehabilitation. The seriousness of the offence and the interests of society were overemphasized to the detriment of these mitigating factors. The court held that these factors constituted substantial and compelling circumstances justifying a departure from the prescribed sentence of life imprisonment. Accordingly, the sentence was set aside and replaced with a t…
Source excerpt
S v Rooiberg (CC56/2014) [2015] ZAECGHC 29 (25 March 2015)
The court found that although the offence was extremely serious and had catastrophic consequences for the victim, the accused's personal circumstances—borderline intellectual functioning, lack of formal education, and absence of previous convictions—constituted substantial and compelling circumstances. The court determined that life imprisonment would be disproportionate and unjust in this case. Instead, a lengthy period of imprisonment would adequately serve the interests of society, protect vulnerable members, and meet the objectives of punishment, including retribution and deterrence.
Source excerpt
M.G v S (A40/2013) [2015] ZAGPPHC 16 (28 January 2015)
The High Court partly upheld the appeal, setting aside rape convictions on two counts and replacing them with lesser sexual offence convictions, with a reduced sentence.
Mabaso v S (AR 250/12) [2013] ZAKZPHC 32; 2014 (1) SACR 299 (KZP) (10 May 2013)
Appeal against sentence in a rape and robbery case. The High Court reduced life imprisonment to 25 years for rape and 8 years for robbery.
Explore more
