South Africa Case Law

Kgatuke and Another v Additional Magistrate C Van Niekerk (Langley) and Another (REV120/23)

Kgatuke and Another v Additional Magistrate C Van Niekerk (Langley) and Another (REV120/23) [2024] ZALMPPHC 199 (4 December 2024)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

REV120/23

Judges

Kganyago, Pillay

The High Court found that the Magistrate's decision to reopen the State's case and admit previously excluded video and audio evidence after both parties had closed their cases and arguments were complete constituted a gross irregularity. The Magistrate, lacking inherent jurisdiction, was not entitled to review her own interlocutory ruling at that stage. The refusal to recuse herself, in the context of her conduct and the timing of the ruling, created a reasonable apprehension of bias and undermined the Applicants' right to a fair trial. The cumulative effect of these irregularities justified…

Source excerpt

• Review Of Magistrates Court Proceedings
• Recusal Of Judicial Officer
• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Fair Trial Rights

Modibedi v Raborife N.O and Another (M614/2022)

Modibedi v Raborife N.O and Another (M614/2022) [2023] ZANWHC 182 (3 October 2023)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

M614/2022

Judges

FMM Reid, S Mfenyana

None of the grounds for review advanced by the applicant were sustained. The court found no evidence that the Magistrate read or relied on the bail affidavit, and her conduct in handing it to the prosecutor was appropriate. The death of the witness was not disputed, and the absence of a death certificate did not constitute a procedural irregularity. The complainant's evidence was uncontested, as the defence chose not to cross-examine, and the Magistrate was correct to accept it. The State was not obliged to call all listed witnesses, and the defence could have called any of them. The absence…

Source excerpt

• Review Of Magistrates Court Proceedings
• Bias And Recusal
• Admission Of Evidence
• Single Witness Cautionary Rule
• Rape Conviction
• Procedural Irregularity

Ojuawo v S and Another (56633/2021)

Ojuawo v S and Another (56633/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 382 (6 June 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

56633/2021

Judge

E van der Schyff

The High Court dismissed a review of an admission of guilt fine, finding the applicant knew the consequences and failed to show the process was unjust.

• Admission Of Guilt Fine
• Review Of Magistrates Court Proceedings
• Criminal Record Consequences
• Constitutional Rights Explanation
• Admission-of-guilt-fine
• Criminal-records

Naidoo v Duki and Another (D5741/2019)

Naidoo v Duki and Another (D5741/2019) [2021] ZAKZDHC 47 (14 December 2021)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

D5741/2019

Judge

Chetty

High Court review of a Regional Court divorce order was dismissed, with the court holding that no gross irregularity was shown in refusing an adjournment and striking the defence.

• Review Of Magistrates Court Proceedings
• Fair Trial Rights
• Universal Partnership
• Maintenance Orders
• Adjournment Refusal
• Review-of-magistrates-court-proceedings

Naidoo v Duki and Another (D5741/2019)

Naidoo v Duki and Another (D5741/2019) [2021] ZAKZDHC 43 (14 December 2021)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

D5741/2019

Judge

Chetty

High Court review of a regional court divorce ruling was dismissed because no gross irregularity was shown and the matter was still incomplete.

• Review Of Magistrates Court Proceedings
• Universal Partnership
• Maintenance Claims
• Fair Trial Rights
• Adjournment Refusal
• Review-of-magistrates-court-proceedings

Milner v The Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Others (23684/2021)

Milner v The Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Others (23684/2021) [2021] ZAGPJHC 591 (4 November 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

23684/2021

Judge

L R Adams

The High Court removed an unopposed application from the roll and directed the applicant to pursue a special review under section 304(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

• Admission Of Guilt Fine
• Review Of Magistrates Court Proceedings
• Criminal Record Expungement
• Criminal Procedure Act Section 304
• Procedural Irregularity
• Admission-of-guilt-fine

S v Sebetso and Others (01/2020)

S v Sebetso and Others (01/2020) [2020] ZANWHC 79 (9 October 2020)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

01/2020

Judge

R D Hendricks

The Acting Regional Magistrate was correct to recuse himself due to his prior involvement in a related civil matter, which could reasonably create an apprehension of bias. The law requires not only actual impartiality but also the appearance thereof. The Regional Court lacked statutory authority to order a de novo trial before another magistrate; only the High Court may do so. Therefore, the proceedings before Mr Tsatsi are set aside and a new trial is ordered before a different Regional Magistrate.

Source excerpt

• Recusal Of Judicial Officer
• Fair Trial Rights
• Review Of Magistrates Court Proceedings

Makoro v Erasmus and Another (M 133/2019)

Makoro v Erasmus and Another (M 133/2019) [2020] ZANWHC 15 (12 March 2020)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

M 133/2019

Judges

Hendricks, Nonyane

The High Court reviewed and set aside a magistrate’s refusal to recuse himself after finding bias and gross irregularity in the conduct of the trial.

• Recusal Of Judicial Officer
• Apprehended Bias
• Gross Irregularity
• Review Of Magistrates Court Proceedings
• Recusal
• Apprehended-bias

Gounden and Another v Noncebu NO and Others (AR119/17)

Gounden and Another v Noncebu NO and Others (AR119/17) [2017] ZAKZPHC 57; 2018 (2) SACR 186 (KZP) (15 December 2017)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

AR119/17

Judges

Mahabeer, Seegobin

The court held that the applicants failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying interference with the ongoing criminal proceedings. Financial distress, as alleged by the applicants, does not constitute a legal ground for review nor does it meet the threshold of rarity or grave injustice required for High Court intervention. The court emphasized the public interest in allowing criminal trials to proceed without piecemeal reviews, noting that such interventions would unduly burden the courts and conflict with both the accused's and the state's right to a speedy trial. As the appli…

Source excerpt

• Review Of Magistrates Court Proceedings
• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Search And Seizure
• Constitutional Right To Privacy
• Onus Of Proof
• Costs In Constitutional Litigation

Mogaecho v Regional Court Magistrate and Another (A162/2016)

Mogaecho v Regional Court Magistrate and Another (A162/2016) [2017] ZAFSHC 176 (2 November 2017)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A162/2016

Judges

Jordaan, Van Schalkwyk

The High Court dismissed a review of a magistrates’ court conviction and sentence, rejecting claims of prosecutorial irregularity, judicial bias, and prejudicial separation of trials.

• Review Of Magistrates Court Proceedings
• Bias Of Judicial Officer
• Separation Of Trials
• Gross Irregularity
• Rule 53 Application
• Review-of-magistrates-court-proceedings