South Africa Case Law

S v Mxanda (CA&R 68/24)

S v Mxanda (CA&R 68/24) [2025] ZANCHC 38 (6 May 2025)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

CA&R 68/24

Judges

Nxumalo, Stanton

The magistrate's order imposing imprisonment in default of payment of compensation under section 300 of the Criminal Procedure Act was incompetent. Section 300 compensation orders are civil in nature and cannot be enforced by criminal sanction. The court set aside the original sentence and substituted it with a compensatory order requiring the accused to pay R400.00 to the complainant for damages caused by her unlawful and intentional damage to window panes. No date for payment or alternative imprisonment was imposed, in line with the requirements of section 300.

Source excerpt

• Malicious Injury To Property
• Compensation Order
• Section 300 Cpa
• Section 112 1 A Cpa
• Sentence Review

S v Dikgoro (C44/2023)

S v Dikgoro (C44/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 650 (1 August 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

C44/2023

Judge

Neukircher

High Court review correcting an incomplete magistrate’s sentence for cocaine possession, confirming a R2,000 fine paid immediately and no firearm disqualification.

• Possession Of Dependence Producing Substance
• Sentence Review
• Drugs And Drug Trafficking Act
• Minimum Sentence Requirements
• Sentence-review
• Drug-possession

S v Ramokgoa (R18/2021)

S v Ramokgoa (R18/2021) [2021] ZAFSHC 122 (29 April 2021)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

R18/2021

Judges

S Naidoo, C Reinders

High Court review holding that entry through an open garage door did not amount to housebreaking. The conviction was reduced to theft and the sentence amended.

• Housebreaking With Intent To Steal And Theft
• Elements Of Theft
• Conviction Substitution
• Sentence Review
• Housebreaking
• Theft

S v Ndala (CC 53 / 2019)

S v Ndala (CC 53 / 2019) [2019] ZAGPPHC 1043 (12 December 2019)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

CC 53 / 2019

Judge

Morrison

The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence, finding no reasonable prospect that another court would differ.

• Leave To Appeal
• Conviction Review
• Sentence Review
• Criminal-law
• Leave-to-appeal
• Conviction-review

Shola v S (A415/2012)

Shola v S (A415/2012) [2019] ZAGPJHC 487 (29 November 2019)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A415/2012

Judges

NC Sethusha, T Maumela

High Court criminal appeal against a fraud conviction and sentence. The court found a misdirection on the evidence, upheld the appeal, and set aside both conviction and sentence.

• Fraud
• Jurisdiction
• Onus Of Proof
• Credibility Of Witnesses
• Appeal Standard
• Sentence Review

Director of Public Prosecutions, Western Cape v Kock (20841/2014)

Director of Public Prosecutions, Western Cape v Kock (20841/2014) [2015] ZASCA 197; 2016 (1) SACR 539 (SCA) (1 December 2015)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

20841/2014

Judges

Navsa, Lewis, Pillay, Mbha, Zondi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the State does not have a statutory right to appeal against a sentence imposed by a High Court sitting as a court of appeal. Section 316B of the Criminal Procedure Act only permits the State to appeal sentences imposed by a superior court sitting as a court of first instance. The general provisions of the Superior Courts Act do not override the specific provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act, which exclusively regulate appeals in criminal matters. The court found that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the State's appeal and struck the matter from the…

Source excerpt

• State Right Of Appeal
• Sentence Review
• Jurisdiction Of Supreme Court Of Appeal
• Criminal Procedure Act
• Superior Courts Act

S v Ncube (A322/15)

S v Ncube (A322/15) [2015] ZAGPPHC 355 (19 May 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A322/15

Judges

Hughes, Tlhapi

On special review, the High Court set aside a magistrate’s sentence for theft because it exceeded the court’s jurisdiction and remitted the matter for fresh sentencing.

• Magistrates Court Jurisdiction
• Sentence Review
• Theft
• Criminal Procedure Act
• Mitigating Factors
• Criminal-law

Scheffers v S (103/2014)

Scheffers v S (103/2014) [2015] ZANCHC 47 (30 January 2015)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

103/2014

Judges

C J Olivier, H J Lacock

The court confirmed a murder conviction but set aside life imprisonment after finding no proof of premeditation, remitting sentence for reconsideration.

• Murder
• Premeditation
• Sentence Review
• Identification Evidence
• Appeal Procedure
• Criminal-law

S v Mosoeu (183/2014)

S v Mosoeu (183/2014) [2014] ZAFSHC 167 (9 October 2014)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

183/2014

Judges

A.F. Jordaan, M.H. Rampai

The court found that the accused's plea explanation covered the elements of housebreaking with intent to steal, but not theft, as nothing was stolen. The conviction for theft was therefore incorrect and had to be amended. The sentence was appropriate except for the reference to theft, which was also amended. The conviction and sentence were set aside and substituted with a conviction for housebreaking with intent to steal and a corresponding sentence.

Source excerpt

• Housebreaking
• Intent To Steal
• Section 112 Plea
• Amendment Of Conviction
• Sentence Review

S v Meeding (193/2011)

S v Meeding (193/2011) [2011] ZAFSHC 151 (1 September 2011)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

193/2011

Judges

R Jordaan, R van Zyl

On special review, the court set aside a conviction and sentence because the protection order allegedly breached had already been rescinded before the offence.

• Protection Order
• Irregular Conviction
• Sentence Review
• Criminal-law
• Protection-orders
• Special-review