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
National Director of Public Prosecutions and Another v Kruger (D10552/2023) [2025] ZAKZDHC 44 (18 July 2025)
The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal against a ruling setting aside POCA prosecution authorisation, finding no reasonable prospect of success.
De Bruin v S (Director of Public Prosecutions) and Another (6359/2024) [2024] ZAFSHC 376; 2025 (1) SACR 231 (FB) (25 November 2024)
The High Court found that the Magistrates’ Court’s postponement of the bail application was unjustified, as the investigating officer did not oppose bail and had verified the applicant’s profile and address. The prosecutor failed to consult the investigating officer and provided no substantial grounds for opposition or postponement. The applicant’s circumstances, including strong community ties, lack of prior convictions, and the absence of evidence of interference with witnesses, constituted exceptional circumstances warranting High Court intervention. The court emphasized that such interven…
Source excerpt
Dituku v National Director of Public Prosecutions (921/2019) [2024] ZANCHC 115 (6 September 2024)
The court found that the plaintiff was prosecuted without reasonable and probable cause and that the prosecution was actuated by malice. The evidence relied upon by the NPA did not implicate the plaintiff in the theft or possession of stolen goats, and the prosecutor failed to objectively assess the available information. The statements of key witnesses exculpated the plaintiff, and the supposed owner of the goats denied ownership and involvement. The prosecutor proceeded with charges despite knowing that the elements of the offences could not be proven, demonstrating reckless disregard for t…
Source excerpt
Maremba and Others v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others (2031/2023) [2024] ZALMPTHC 15 (8 February 2024)
The High Court dismissed a review application challenging a DPP’s decision to prosecute, holding the DPP could review the DDPP’s earlier inquest referral.
Golding and Others v S (63/2019) [2022] ZAKZDHC 20 (11 May 2022)
The court dismissed a section 342A application alleging unreasonable trial delay, finding the delays did not cumulatively meet the legal threshold.
S v Moussa (SS90/2008) [2021] ZAGPJHC 61; [2021] 3 All SA 599 (GJ); 2021 (2) SACR 378 (GJ) (19 May 2021)
The court found that Adv Naidoo, the prosecutor, abused her position by entering into an agreement with the accused that implied withdrawal of charges upon payment of R1 million to Absa Bank. This conduct was outside her authority and contrary to the constitutional and statutory duties of a prosecutor. However, the abuse did not affect the title to prosecute, which vests in the prosecutorial authority (DPP/DDPP), not in individual prosecutors. The accused failed to prove that the continuation of prosecution constituted an abuse of the court process or that the prosecution was instituted for a…
Source excerpt
Raves v Director of Public Prosecutions, Western Cape and Another (A150/2020) [2021] ZAWCHC 11; 2021 (2) SACR 140 (WCC) (3 February 2021)
The court held that the indictment sufficiently disclosed offences under POCA for which the appellant could be charged and convicted. The appellant's association with the enterprise, through repeated acquisition of stolen firearms from FLASH, constituted a pattern of racketeering activity as defined in POCA, regardless of his lack of direct connection to Accused No.1. The delays in prosecution, while regrettable, did not amount to irreparable trial prejudice warranting a permanent stay, as the appellant was not uniquely prejudiced and the delays were largely attributable to circumstances beyo…
Source excerpt
Khumalo v Minister of Police and Another (17132/15) [2020] ZAWCHC 77; 2021 (1) SACR 551 (WCC) (29 July 2020)
The High Court held the DPP liable for malicious prosecution and unlawful detention, but dismissed the claim against the Minister of Police.
Stanfield and Others v National Director of Public Prosecutions Advocate Abrahams N.O and Another (40248/18) [2019] ZAGPPHC 429; 2020 (1) SACR 232 (GP) (17 September 2019)
The court held that the applicants' reliance on PAJA to review the NDPP's decision was incompetent, as prosecutorial decisions are expressly excluded from administrative action under section 1(ff) of PAJA. The only permissible review is on the grounds of legality and rationality, which was not properly pleaded or substantiated by the applicants. The NDPP acted within statutory powers under section 22(3) of the NPA Act and section 111 of the CPA, and was entitled to specify the place of trial. The majority of accused and the investigation team are based in the Western Cape, making Khayelitsha…
Source excerpt
Thwala v Minister of Police and Another (14026/2014) [2018] ZAGPPHC 561 (8 August 2018)
The court found that the police officer, Koch, exercised his discretion properly in executing the warrant of arrest, as he maintained a reasonable suspicion based on the evidence available, including circumstantial evidence and failed attempts to corroborate exculpatory statements. Therefore, the claim for unlawful arrest and detention failed. However, the prosecution service, upon receiving the docket, failed to properly assess the admissibility and sufficiency of the evidence. The prosecution was initiated and maintained without reasonable or probable cause, as the evidence never rose above…
Source excerpt
Explore more
