Esheria South Africa Case Law
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
4 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Criminal Law [2025] ZALMPPHC 20

Director of Public Prosecutions and Another v Netshidzivhe and Others (HCAA 08/2024)

Director of Public Prosecutions and Another v Netshidzivhe and Others (HCAA 08/2024) [2025] ZALMPPHC 20 (10 February 2025)

Court
Limpopo High Court, Polokwane
Case number
HCAA 08/2024
Judges
Pillay AJ, Mashamba AJ, Nkoana AJ

The court held that the requirements in paragraph 12 of the entrapment application form are not statutory requirements under section 252A of the Criminal Procedure Act. Non-compliance with section 252A affects only the admissibility of evidence, which is a matter for the criminal trial court, not for review under PAJA. The decision to prosecute is specifically excluded from the definition of administrative action in PAJA and is only reviewable on grounds of legality and rationality, not under PAJA. The court a quo erred by usurping the powers of the criminal trial court and by granting orders…

Source excerpt

  • Entrapment
  • Review Of Prosecutorial Decisions
  • Admissibility Of Evidence
  • Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
  • Criminal Procedure Act Section 252a
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2016] ZAGPPHC 356

Moti v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Another (65493/15)

Moti v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Another (65493/15) [2016] ZAGPPHC 356 (24 May 2016)

Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
65493/15
Judge
P D Moseamo

The court found that the decision not to prosecute the applicant was made by Johnson, a Senior Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions in the office of the DPP North Gauteng, and not by the NDPP. There was no evidence that Johnson was delegated the NDPP's power to make the decision on behalf of the NDPP. Section 179(5)(d) of the Constitution empowers the NDPP to review decisions to prosecute or not to prosecute, after consulting the relevant DPP and taking representations from relevant parties. The NDPP, through the Deputy NDPP, acted within the scope of the empowering statute by inviting the…

Source excerpt

  • Prosecutorial Discretion
  • Functus Officio
  • Review Of Prosecutorial Decisions
  • Principle Of Legality
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2012] ZASCA 15

Democratic Alliance and Others v Acting National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others (288/11)

Democratic Alliance and Others v Acting National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others (288/11) [2012] ZASCA 15; 2012 (3) SA 486 (SCA); [2012] 2 All SA 345 (SCA); 2012 (6) BCLR 613 (SCA) (20 March 2012)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
288/11
Judges
MPATI, NAVSA, BOSIELO, TSHIQI, PLASKET

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the decision by the Acting National Director of Public Prosecutions to discontinue prosecution is subject to judicial review for compliance with constitutional principles, specifically the rule of law and legality. The Court found that the Democratic Alliance, as a registered political party and official opposition, has standing to bring the review application both in its own interest and in the public interest, given its role in upholding constitutional values and representing the electorate. The Court ordered that the record of the decision be produced,…

Source excerpt

  • Locus Standi
  • Review Of Prosecutorial Decisions
  • Rule Of Law
  • Production Of Record
  • Public Interest Litigation
  • Uniform Rule 53
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2009] ZAGPJHC 44

Rudolph and Another v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Another (35697/08)

Rudolph and Another v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Another (35697/08) [2009] ZAGPJHC 44 (18 August 2009)

Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
35697/08
Judge
Van Oosten

The application was dismissed because section 179(5)(d) of the Constitution did not apply to the decisions made by the DPP, as the NDPP was not involved. The applicants were not entitled to make representations prior to the decision to re-prosecute. The challenge based on alleged non-compliance with the Policy Manual failed due to lack of substance and absence of demonstrated prejudice. The argument regarding unlawful arrest was not supported by the founding papers and was considered an afterthought. The evidence provided by the respondents was relevant and did not prejudice the applicants. T…

Source excerpt

  • Prosecutorial Discretion
  • Section 179 Constitution
  • Policy Manual Compliance
  • Unlawful Arrest
  • Review Of Prosecutorial Decisions
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2009] ZASCA 1

National Director of Public Prosecutions v Zuma (573/08)

National Director of Public Prosecutions v Zuma (573/08) [2009] ZASCA 1; 2009 (2) SA 277 (SCA) ; 2009 (1) SACR 361 (SCA) ; 2009 (4) BCLR 393 (SCA) ; [2009] 2 All SA 243 (SCA) (12 January 2009)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
573/08
Judges
Harms, Farlam, Ponnan, Maya, Cachalia

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that section 179(5)(d) of the Constitution does not apply to a reconsideration by the NDPP of his own earlier decisions, but only to reviews of decisions made by DPPs or other prosecutors for whom a DPP is responsible. The Ngcuka decision not to prosecute Mr Zuma was not final and was limited to specific counts; the subsequent Mpshe decision was not a review of the Ngcuka decision but a new decision based on additional evidence and changed circumstances. Mr Zuma did not have a legitimate expectation to be invited to make representations, as there was no clear…

Source excerpt

  • Prosecutorial Independence
  • Review Of Prosecutorial Decisions
  • Legitimate Expectation
  • Audi Alteram Partem
  • Motion Proceedings
  • Costs Orders
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.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.