South Africa Case Law

Maphakela v S (A257/2016)

Maphakela v S (A257/2016) [2016] ZAGPPHC 978 (29 November 2016)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A257/2016

Judges

N Davis, S P Mothle, E M Molahlehi

The court found that the detention of the complainants during the robbery was not intended as a separate act of kidnapping, but was a necessary means to facilitate the robbery. Applying the single intent test, the court held that the sole intent of the perpetrators was to commit robbery, and the deprivation of liberty was incidental to that purpose. Therefore, convicting the appellant of both robbery and kidnapping amounted to a duplication of convictions. The convictions and sentences for kidnapping were set aside.

Source excerpt

• Duplication Of Convictions
• Kidnapping
• Robbery
• Single Intent Test
• Splitting Of Charges

S v Erasmus (229/2015, 17/2016)

S v Erasmus (229/2015, 17/2016) [2016] ZANCHC 35 (4 November 2016)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

229/2015, 17/2016

Judges

C J Olivier, S L Erasmus

The court found that after withdrawal of the main charge, the two alternative counts of theft and trespassing were treated as substantive counts. The accused admitted all elements of both offences, but his statement made clear that trespassing was committed solely to facilitate the theft, demonstrating a single intent and a continuous criminal transaction. Applying the single intent and continuous transaction tests, the court held that the conviction for trespassing amounted to a duplication of convictions and should be set aside. The references to 'Alt' and '2nd Alt' in the charge sheet were…

Source excerpt

• Duplication Of Convictions
• Theft
• Trespassing
• Single Intent Test
• Criminal Procedure Act
• Trespass Act

S v Mayona and Another (181/2012, 182/2012)

S v Mayona and Another (181/2012, 182/2012) [2012] ZAFSHC 212 (15 November 2012)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

181/2012, 182/2012

Judges

Van der Merwe, Mocumie

The court held that a Mine Health and Safety regulation remained in force, but set aside convictions under it as an impermissible duplication with trespassing.

• Duplication Of Convictions
• Trespassing Act
• Mine Health And Safety Act
• Statutory Offences
• Criminal Procedure
• Single Intent Test