South Africa Case Law

Mokoena v S (200/2018)

Mokoena v S (200/2018) [2019] ZASCA 74; 2019 (2) SACR 355 (SCA) (30 May 2019)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

200/2018

Judges

Maya P, Tshiqi JA, Saldulker JA, Swain JA, Gorven AJA

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the magistrate's decision to close the defence case under section 342A(3)(d) of the Criminal Procedure Act was procedurally irregular because the required notice under section 342A(4)(a) had not been given by the State. This defect was material, as it resulted in the exclusion of evidence and a failure of justice, thereby vitiating the proceedings. The high court erred in remitting the matter to the same magistrate, who had already made adverse credibility findings against the appellant, which would compromise the fairness of any further proceedings. Acco…

Source excerpt

• Criminal Procedure Act Section 342a
• Unreasonable Trial Delay
• Right To Fair Trial
• Remittal Of Case
• Technical Irregularity

Sebofi v S (A136/2014)

Sebofi v S (A136/2014) [2016] ZAGPJHC 290 (25 October 2016)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A136/2014

Judges

R M Keightley, S Kuny

The High Court's remittal order was clear and limited the magistrate's powers to hearing new evidence only on the DNA and cellphone records. The magistrate exceeded this mandate by recalling witnesses and eliciting evidence on broader issues, including matters already decided and credibility findings. This constituted a gross irregularity, vitiating the trial and undermining the appellant's right to a fair trial. The irregularity was so fundamental that it was impossible to separate the permissible evidence from the impermissible, and the only appropriate remedy was to set aside the convictio…

Source excerpt

• Irregularity In Trial
• Remittal Of Case
• Double Jeopardy
• Section 304 Criminal Procedure Act
• Fair Trial Rights

S v Mosito (310/2004)

S v Mosito (310/2004) [2004] ZAFSHC 32 (13 May 2004)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

310/2004

Judges

G.F. Wright, G. Van Coppenhagen

Review of a guilty-plea conviction set aside because the accused was not questioned under section 112(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

• Criminal Procedure Act
• Guilty Plea
• Section 112 Procedure
• Remittal Of Case
• Guilty-plea
• Criminal-procedure-act

Media Workers Association of South Africa and Others v Press Corporation of South Africa Ltd. (Perskor) (33/91)

Media Workers Association of South Africa and Others v Press Corporation of South Africa Ltd. (Perskor) (33/91) [1992] ZASCA 149; 1992 (4) SA 791 (AD); [1992] 2 All SA 453 (A); (1992) 13 ILJ 1391 (A) (17 September 1992)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

33/91

Judges

Botha, EM Grosskopf, Goldstone, Krieger, Harms

The court held that Labour Appeal Court assessors must join in deciding whether proven facts amount to an unfair labour practice, and remitted the matter.

• Unfair Labour Practice
• Role Of Assessors
• Judicial Discretion
• Remittal Of Case
• Unfair-labour-practice
• Labour-appeals