Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
5 court collections
Last checked

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Criminal Law [2023] ZANCHC 92

S v Teu (R18/2023; CA&R36/2021; CA&R 24/2021)

S v Teu (R18/2023; CA&R36/2021; CA&R 24/2021) [2023] ZANCHC 92; 2024 (1) SACR 543 (NCK) (28 November 2023)

The High Court refused the accused’s recusal bid and sent the matter back to the Regional Court for further evidence before the same magistrate.

  • Remittal For Further Evidence
  • Recusal Of Judicial Officer
  • Requirements For Reopening Case
  • Remittal-for-further-evidence
  • Magistrate-recusal
  • Reopening-criminal-case
Read case analysis
Family And Children [2023] ZAGPPHC 1955

K.R.M v J.M.M (A161/2023)

K.R.M v J.M.M (A161/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1955 (27 November 2023)

Appeal against a divorce forfeiture order remitted to the court a quo because the record did not establish when the immovable property was acquired or owned.

  • Forfeiture Of Matrimonial Benefits
  • Division Of Joint Estate
  • Divorce Act Section 9
  • Ownership Of Property
  • Costs In Divorce
  • Remittal For Further Evidence
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2014] ZASCA 186

Nkomo v S (979/2013)

Nkomo v S (979/2013) [2014] ZASCA 186 (26 November 2014)

The Supreme Court of Appeal upheld an appeal and remitted a rape case for further evidence after the complainant recanted in a post-trial letter.

  • Remittal For Further Evidence
  • Recantation Of Testimony
  • Rape
  • Application To Reopen Case
  • Criminal-appeal
  • Remittal-for-further-evidence
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2014] ZAGPJHC 260

Motsagki v S (2013/ A5043)

Motsagki v S (2013/ A5043) [2014] ZAGPJHC 260 (14 October 2014)

The High Court set aside a rape conviction and life sentence, finding the trial unfair because key forensic and cellphone evidence was never properly investigated or led.

  • Rape
  • Single Witness Evidence
  • Fair Trial Rights
  • Criminal Procedure Act
  • Remittal For Further Evidence
  • Forensic Evidence
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2004] ZAECHC 24

S v Toba and Another (ECJ 2004/019)

S v Toba and Another (ECJ 2004/019) [2004] ZAECHC 24; [2006] 4 All SA 492 (E); 2008 (1) SACR 415 (E) (26 August 2004)

The court found that the appellants failed to establish that they did not receive a fair trial. The decision by their attorney not to call them as witnesses was made after consultation and was within his professional discretion. The explanation for not leading further evidence was insufficient and did not meet the requirements for remittal. Furthermore, the application was fatally defective as it did not specify the evidence to be presented. The court held that the complainant's evidence was credible and properly tested in cross-examination, and the magistrate's judgment was sound. The convic…

  • Right To Fair Trial
  • Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel
  • Remittal For Further Evidence
  • Rape
  • Sentencing Discretion
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [1997] ZASCA 108

S v Hanuman (593/96)

S v Hanuman (593/96) [1997] ZASCA 108; [1998] 1 All SA 254 (A) (27 November 1997)

The Supreme Court of Appeal refused a remittal based on the complainant’s recanting affidavit and upheld convictions and a six-year sentence for rape and indecent assault.

  • Rape
  • Indecent Assault
  • Recantation Of Evidence
  • Remittal For Further Evidence
  • Credibility Of Witnesses
  • Criminal-law
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.