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
S v Rajabu (Review) (65/2025) [2025] ZAWCHC 160 (1 April 2025)
The High Court set aside a criminal trial after finding the accused was represented by a struck-off lawyer, which caused a fatal irregularity.
S v Mokoena (16/2022; A 1115/2020) [2022] ZAFSHC 107 (4 May 2022)
The High Court set aside part-heard criminal proceedings where the presiding magistrate was unavailable, holding the accused’s speedy-trial rights were prejudiced.
S v Makibi (R 84/2020) [2021] ZAFSHC 77 (11 March 2021)
The court found that the presiding magistrate's prolonged absence due to ill health and subsequent retirement rendered him unable to finalize the partly heard case. Further postponement would not serve the interests of justice. The proceedings were therefore set aside in their entirety, and the Director of Public Prosecutions was granted liberty to institute prosecution afresh if deemed appropriate.
Source excerpt
S v A.N (CA&R15/2018) [2018] ZAECGHC 3 (16 January 2018)
The High Court set aside magistrates’ court proceedings because the accused was 17 and should have been dealt with under the Child Justice Act.
S v Mokhethi (R50/2016(B)) [2017] ZAFSHC 7 (3 February 2017)
The High Court set aside a criminal conviction and sentence after finding the trial proceeded unfairly in the accused’s absence, and ordered a fresh trial.
S v Brink (20160080) [2016] ZAECGHC 90 (22 September 2016)
On special review, the High Court set aside a magistrate’s court trial after finding a reasonable apprehension of bias because the accused was married to a prosecutor who worked with the magistrate.
S v Pretorius (A334/2016) [2016] ZAGPPHC 399 (24 May 2016)
On special review, the High Court set aside the Nigel magistrate’s record because no usable original or reconstructed record of the proceedings could be obtained.
S v Mpunga and Others (A44.2016) [2016] ZAGPPHC 59 (28 January 2016)
The High Court found that representation by an unqualified person constitutes a fundamental irregularity that undermines the integrity of criminal proceedings. The right to a fair trial, as enshrined in the Constitution, requires that accused persons be represented by admitted legal practitioners. Since Mr Lekota was not admitted as an attorney, his representation of accused No 2 and 3 was unlawful. The effect of such irregular representation cannot be disentangled from the proceedings, and the irregularity is so serious that it nullifies the entire trial. Therefore, the trial proceedings mus…
Source excerpt
S v Ngene (A605/15, 419/15, 05/2015, D509/2014) [2015] ZAGPPHC 982 (31 August 2015)
High Court review setting aside magistrate’s proceedings because the magistrate was unable to continue due to serious health problems.
S v Ajose (14/295/2013) [2015] ZAGPPHC 506 (18 May 2015)
The High Court set aside irregular proceedings from the Pretoria Regional Court and remitted the matter for a fresh hearing before another magistrate.
Explore more
