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
Masigo v S (Sentence Appeal) (CA53/2024) [2025] ZANWHC 112 (3 July 2025)
The High Court dismissed a sentence appeal and confirmed eight years’ direct imprisonment for theft out of a motor vehicle.
Van Jaarsveld v S; Ras v S (1105/2023; 885/2024) [2025] ZASCA 92 (20 June 2025)
The Supreme Court of Appeal found that section 298 of the Criminal Procedure Act does not empower a trial court to alter a verdict after it has been pronounced; any such amendment constitutes a material misdirection. The trial court erred in convicting Van Jaarsveld on forgery after initially acquitting him, and this conviction was set aside. Regarding sentence, the Court held that both trial courts failed to adequately consider the appellants' personal circumstances, the impact on minor children, and the cumulative effect of sentences. The sentences imposed were found to be unduly harsh and…
Source excerpt
Nel v S (708/2023) [2025] ZASCA 89 (12 June 2025)
The Supreme Court of Appeal struck off Mr Kobus Nel’s reconsideration application, holding that he had not shown exceptional circumstances under s 17(2)(f).
S v Boomgaard (CC21/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 516 (16 May 2025)
The court convicted the accused of premeditated murders, robbery with aggravating circumstances, theft, and fraud, relying on strong circumstantial, forensic, and electronic evidence.
Rule v S (Appeal) (A169/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 410 (25 April 2025)
The High Court upheld an appeal against sentence for theft, finding the trial court overemphasized the offence and underweighted mitigation, and substituted a lower concurrent term.
Cetyiwe v S (CA&R 148/2024) [2025] ZAECMKHC 27 (25 March 2025)
The High Court partly upheld an appeal against criminal convictions, setting aside counts 1, 3 and 4, but confirming the theft conviction on count 2.
S v Langa and Others (CC40/2020) [2025] ZAGPPHC 314 (24 March 2025)
The High Court convicted several accused from a series of armed robberies in Ratanda and Heidelberg, relying on CCTV, eyewitness evidence, fingerprints, and ballistics.
Ndyamarha and Another v S (Appeal) (CA & R 245/2022) [2025] ZAECMKHC 22 (11 March 2025)
The court found that the evidence established the essential elements of theft. The appellants received payment for accommodation that was never provided, and the 'virtual bed & breakfast' entities were fictitious. The first appellant conceded under cross-examination that he had no legitimate claim to the funds. The argument that the matter was a civil breach of contract was rejected, as the facts satisfied the requirements for theft as set out in S v Boesak. The trial magistrate's factual findings were upheld, and there was no basis for interference by the appeal court.
Source excerpt
S v Rankali and Others (KS 3/2019) [2025] ZANCHC 6 (28 January 2025)
The High Court convicted several accused for robbery-related crimes arising from a farm attack, relying on circumstantial evidence, admissions, and cellphone records.
S v M.V.M and Another (Review) (REV 150/2024) [2024] ZALMPPHC 178 (15 November 2024)
On automatic review, the High Court replaced robbery convictions on count 1 with theft after finding the phone was obtained by misrepresentation, not force.
Explore more
