South Africa Case Law

M.F v S (A176/2024)

M.F v S (A176/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 134 (19 May 2025)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A176/2024

Judges

Naidoo, Daniso

The sentencing court committed a material misdirection by proceeding without a pre-sentence report, contrary to statutory requirements and constitutional principles protecting minors. The court failed to properly individualize the sentence and consider the best interests of the child, as well as the appellant's prospects for rehabilitation. The imposed sentence of 10 years' imprisonment was harsh, inappropriate, and induced a sense of shock. The appellate court intervened, setting aside the sentence and substituting it with two years' imprisonment, antedated to the original sentencing date.

Source excerpt

• Sentencing Of Minors
• Pre Sentence Report
• Child Justice Act
• Rehabilitation Of Offenders

S v Dhliwayo (207/2024; A113/2024)

S v Dhliwayo (207/2024; A113/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 139 (25 March 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A113/2024

Judges

Pangarker, Sher

The court found that the accused was 17 years and 10 months old at the time of the commission of the offence, but was 18 at the time of his first appearance and arrest. The magistrate erred in not recognizing the significance of the accused's age at the time of the offence and failed to apply the Child Justice Act and the constitutional protections afforded to children. However, the legislative framework requires that the Child Justice Act applies only if the accused was under 18 at the time of arrest, unless the Director of Public Prosecutions issues a directive for its application to those…

Source excerpt

• Child Justice Act
• Sentencing Of Minors
• Robbery
• Constitutional Rights Of Children

Vardien v S (A36/2024)

Vardien v S (A36/2024) [2024] ZAWCHC 79 (11 March 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A36/2024

Judge

Slingers

The High Court dismissed an appeal against refusal of bail pending appeal, finding the Child Justice Act did not apply and no basis to disturb the flight-risk assessment.

• Bail Pending Appeal
• Child Justice Act
• Automatic Right Of Appeal
• Sentencing Of Minors
• Flight Risk
• Exceptional Circumstances

S v A R; S v R B; S v A C (B5/2019; B78/2019; SHA70/2018)

S v A R; S v R B; S v A C (B5/2019; B78/2019; SHA70/2018) [2019] ZAWCHC 146; 2020 (1) SACR 580 (WCC) (1 November 2019)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

B5/2019; B78/2019; SHA70/2018

Judges

K M Savage, L J Bozalek

High Court review of three juvenile criminal matters clarified that the Firearms Control Act requires a finding of unfitness, not an affirmative “fit” order.

• Firearms Control Act
• Child Justice Act
• Automatic Review
• Fitness To Possess Firearm
• Sentencing Of Minors
• Automatic-review

S v S.P (RCD117/2016)

S v S.P (RCD117/2016) [2017] ZAWCHC 41 (16 February 2017)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

RCD117/2016

Judge

Holderness

High Court review of a child’s robbery conviction held that the magistrate corrected an age error, applied the Child Justice Act properly, and the sentence stood.

• Child Justice Act
• Automatic Review
• Sentencing Of Minors
• Diversion
• Error In Age Determination
• Child-justice-act

E.E v S (CA&R21/2014)

E.E v S (CA&R21/2014) [2016] ZANCHC 51 (9 September 2016)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

CA&R21/2014

Judges

Williams, Erasmus

The Regional Magistrate materially misdirected herself by applying the minimum sentence legislation to the appellant, who was a minor at the time of the offence. The Constitutional Court has declared such application unconstitutional. Sentencing must be reconsidered in accordance with the Child Justice Act, which prioritizes the best interests of the child and prescribes imprisonment only as a last resort. The seriousness of the offence warrants imprisonment, but the appellant's age and status as a first offender require tempering the sentence. The delay in finalizing the appeal and the appel…

Source excerpt

• Child Justice Act
• Sentencing Of Minors
• Minimum Sentence Legislation
• Best Interests Of Child

S v T.N.S (14658)

S v T.N.S (14658) [2014] ZAWCHC 160; [2015] 1 All SA 223 (WCC); 2015 (1) SACR 489 (WCC) (29 October 2014)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

14658

Judges

Saldanha, Rogers

Automatic review of a child homicide conviction set aside because criminal capacity and possible private defence were not properly established.

• Criminal Capacity Of Children
• Culpable Homicide
• Private Defence
• Child Justice Act
• Sentencing Of Minors
• Criminal-capacity-of-children

S v P (322/2013)

S v P (322/2013) [2014] ZAFSHC 89 (5 June 2014)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

322/2013

Judges

N.M. MBHELE, L.J. LEKALE

High Court review confirming a child’s theft conviction and correcting an unlawful sentence under the Child Justice Act.

• Child Justice Act
• Plea Procedure
• Guardian Assistance
• Review Procedure
• Sentencing Of Minors
• Child-justice-act

Motaung v S (A240/11)

Motaung v S (A240/11) [2013] ZAFSHC 89 (6 June 2013)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A240/11

Judges

R Jordaan, WND RP Rampai, R Mocumie

The appeal against sentence largely failed. The High Court upheld the prison sentences but set aside the order barring parole until two-thirds of the term was served.

• Child Justice Act
• Sentencing Of Minors
• Parole Eligibility
• Minimum Sentences
• Criminal-sentencing
• Child-justice-act

S v Sekoere (141/2012)

S v Sekoere (141/2012) [2012] ZAFSHC 114; 2013 (1) SACR 92 (FB) (14 June 2012)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

141/2012

Judges

L J Lekale, M B Molemela

The court held that sentences imposed on minor children under the Child Justice Act are not automatically reviewable where the accused was legally represented at trial. The provisions of section 302(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, as amended by the Child Justice Act, do not extend automatic review to cases involving legal representation. The legislature's intention was to afford additional protection to certain categories of minors, but not to exclude the requirement of lack of legal representation for automatic review. The court found that the Free State High Court has no jurisdiction to r…

Source excerpt

• Child Justice Act
• Automatic Review
• Legal Representation
• Sentencing Of Minors