Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Sibisi and Another v S (AR171/20) [2024] ZAKZPHC 107 (11 September 2024)
The High Court upheld the appellants’ sentence appeal, finding the trial court failed to consider time spent in custody awaiting trial and other mitigating factors.
S v Funaphi and Others (Sentence) (353/2022) [2024] ZAECMKHC 28 (29 February 2024)
The High Court sentenced three accused for murder, robbery and related offences, finding substantial and compelling circumstances to avoid life imprisonment.
S v Lekhooana and Another (CC 1/2021) [2023] ZAECQBHC 24 (19 April 2023)
The court found that, although the offences were serious and had a devastating impact on the deceased's family, both accused were first offenders with no previous convictions and had challenging personal circumstances. The cumulative effect of these mitigating factors, as highlighted in the probation officer's reports and defence submissions, constituted substantial and compelling circumstances justifying deviation from the prescribed minimum sentences. The court emphasised the need for proportionality and mercy in sentencing, balancing the interests of society with the potential for rehabili…
Source excerpt
Gaosiwe and Another v S (A281/2017) [2019] ZAGPPHC 1001 (24 October 2019)
Appeal against rape convictions and life sentences. Convictions were upheld, but the second appellant’s sentence was reduced to 12 years because he was under 18 at the time of the offence.
S v Mncwengi and Others (SS03/2013) [2015] ZAWCHC 43 (24 March 2015)
The court found that all accused acted together with common purpose in the kidnapping and murder of three young men, motivated by the theft of a television. The offences were committed with brutality and disregard for the victims' rights and the rule of law. While the context of high crime and police inefficiency in Khayelitsha was acknowledged, the court held that vigilantism cannot be tolerated and that the interests of society require adequate punishment. The personal circumstances of the accused, their previously law-abiding status, and the period spent in custody were considered substant…
Source excerpt
Explore more
