South Africa Case Law

Van der Walt and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another - On Review (1176/2023)

Van der Walt and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another - On Review (1176/2023) [2023] ZAECMKHC 117 (12 October 2023)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

1176/2023

Judges

Rugunanan, Beshe

The applicants failed to provide sufficient detail regarding the charges or the grounds for their objections, rendering the review impossible. Their reliance on the Superior Courts Act is misplaced, as they did not allege any of the statutory grounds for review such as bias or corruption. The PAJA does not apply to judicial functions of magistrates or decisions to institute or continue prosecution. The applicants misconstrued the definition of administrative action and failed to establish any basis for impugning the competence of the prosecuting authority. The jurisdictional objection was not…

Source excerpt

• Review Of Magistrates Decision
• Permanent Stay Of Prosecution
• Jurisdiction Of Trial Court
• Administrative Action Exclusion
• Delay In Review
• Section 85 Objection

S v Salusalu - Review Judgment (CA&R 23/2023)

S v Salusalu - Review Judgment (CA&R 23/2023) [2023] ZAECBHC 29; 2025 (1) SACR 554 (ECB) (7 September 2023)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Bhisho

Case number

CA&R 23/2023

Judges

GH Bloem, MJ Lowe

High Court review of a domestic violence conviction set aside because the magistrate wrongly placed an onus on the accused and the evidence did not prove the charge.

• Domestic Violence Act
• Burden Of Proof
• Review Of Magistrates Decision
• Abuse Of Process
• Domestic-violence-act
• Burden-of-proof

S v Moholobela (CA&R 29/23)

S v Moholobela (CA&R 29/23) [2023] ZANCHC 44 (11 August 2023)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

CA&R 29/23

Judges

L P Tlaletsi, M C Mamosebo

The High Court set aside a guilty plea conviction because the accused was convicted on a charge sheet belonging to someone else.

• Irregular Proceedings
• Wrongful Conviction
• Immigration Act Offence
• Review Of Magistrates Decision
• Special-review
• Wrongful-conviction

Mshudulu v Regional Court Magistrate Kimberley, Northern Cape and Another (1518/2021)

Mshudulu v Regional Court Magistrate Kimberley, Northern Cape and Another (1518/2021) [2022] ZANCHC 25; 2023 (1) SACR 108 (NCK) (20 May 2022)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1518/2021

Judges

Lever, Chwaro

The High Court dismissed a pre-trial review of a magistrate’s refusal to hold a trial-within-a-trial over recorded calls, finding no exceptional circumstances or irreparable harm.

• Review Of Magistrates Decision
• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Trial Within A Trial
• Exceptional Circumstances
• Irreparable Harm
• Criminal-review

S v Elgin (274/21)

S v Elgin (274/21) [2021] ZAWCHC 147; 2022 (1) SACR 325 (WCC) (5 August 2021)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

274/21

Judges

DM Thulare, ED Wille

The High Court found that the accused was not properly informed of her rights or the consequences of paying the admission of guilt fine. The documentation did not sufficiently demonstrate that the accused understood the permanent impact of her actions, nor was she given a meaningful choice between paying the fine and contesting the charge in court. The new facts in her affidavit, including her mental state and lack of procedural explanation, were not before the magistrate at the time of certification. The failure to explain the consequences and provide alternatives amounted to a failure of ju…

Source excerpt

• Admission Of Guilt Fine
• Criminal Record
• Procedural Fairness
• Review Of Magistrates Decision

Mansoor and Others v Greyvenstein and Another (1772/2018)

Mansoor and Others v Greyvenstein and Another (1772/2018) [2019] ZAMPMHC 13 (9 September 2019)

Court

Middelburg High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

1772/2018

Judge

Brauckmann

The High Court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate any grave injustice or gross irregularity that would justify intervention in the unterminated criminal proceedings before the Magistrate. The Magistrate provided clear reasons for her decisions regarding the admissibility of evidence and properly excluded inadmissible evidence. The alleged fusion of SAPS and private investigators was not substantiated, and the facts were distinguishable from S v Burger. The Magistrate did not improperly take over the prosecution, and any minor interference did not amount to a gross irregularity. T…

Source excerpt

• Section 174 Discharge
• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Gross Irregularity
• Review Of Magistrates Decision
• Constitutional Rights
• Stock Theft

Stemela v Moalusi and Another (2017/13746)

Stemela v Moalusi and Another (2017/13746) [2019] ZAGPJHC 87 (12 March 2019)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2017/13746

Judges

K La M Manamela, ML Twala

The High Court held that it will not ordinarily intervene in uncompleted criminal proceedings in the lower court unless grave injustice would result, which was not established by the applicant. The applicant failed to show that the absence of the original or certified copy of the final protection order and proof of service would cause irreparable harm or infringe his constitutional rights. The applicant retains the right to challenge the State's compliance with the Domestic Violence Act during the trial and is not prejudiced in his defence. The Magistrate's ruling was interlocutory and subjec…

Source excerpt

• Domestic Violence Act
• Review Of Magistrates Decision
• Interlocutory Orders
• Fair Trial Rights

S.J (Born M) v M.K.J and Another (5250/17)

S.J (Born M) v M.K.J and Another (5250/17) [2017] ZAECMHC 53 (14 December 2017)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

5250/17

Judge

Z. M. Nhlangulela

The High Court struck an urgent review application from the roll, finding no genuine urgency, improper use of truncated process, and an academic relief request.

• Urgency In Motion Proceedings
• Form Of Notice
• Review Of Magistrates Decision
• Civil-procedure
• Urgent-applications
• Review-procedure

S v Nzilane (273/2017)

S v Nzilane (273/2017) [2017] ZAGPPHC 871 (16 October 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

273/2017

Judge

N Janse Van Nieuwenhuizen

On special review, the High Court set aside an assault conviction entered as an alternative charge, because the accused had been convicted on both the main and alternative charges.

• Domestic Violence Act
• Criminal Procedure Act
• Double Conviction
• Review Of Magistrates Decision
• Criminal-procedure
• Domestic-violence

Director of Public Prosecutions Gauteng Local Division, Johannesburg v Regional Magistrate, Krugersdorp and Another (2016/20222)

Director of Public Prosecutions Gauteng Local Division, Johannesburg v Regional Magistrate, Krugersdorp and Another (2016/20222) [2017] ZAGPJHC 138 (16 May 2017)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2016/20222

Judges

Makume, Wepener

The court found that the magistrate's decision to discharge the accused at the close of the State's case was a gross irregularity. The evidence established a prima facie case of unlawful killing, and the accused admitted to causing the death. Legal precedent requires that in such circumstances, the evidential burden shifts to the accused to rebut the presumption of unlawfulness, and a discharge under s 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act is not permissible. The magistrate's reasoning was flawed, as it misunderstood the State's aim and failed to apply the correct legal standards. The irregularit…

Source excerpt

• Criminal Procedure Act Section 174
• Gross Irregularity
• Review Of Magistrates Decision
• Double Jeopardy
• Superior Courts Act Section 22