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 Lutshetu and Others (Sentence) (81/2020) [2025] ZAWCHC 211 (21 May 2025)
The High Court sentenced four accused to life imprisonment for two murders of law enforcement officers, plus concurrent terms for robbery and firearm offences.
S v Lutshetu and Others (CC 81/2020) [2025] ZAWCHC 104 (13 March 2025)
The court found that the State proved its case beyond reasonable doubt through circumstantial evidence, forensic analysis, and the recovery of the stolen firearms from the accused soon after the crime. The accused were found in possession of the firearms robbed from the deceased officers, and ballistic evidence linked the weapons to the crime scene. The informer’s tip led police to the shack where the accused were arrested and the firearms recovered. The accused’s versions were inconsistent, improbable, and contradicted by the evidence. The court rejected the defence’s claim of police conspir…
Source excerpt
Fourie and Others v S (A257/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1287; [2025] 2 All SA 205 (GP) (6 December 2024)
The court found that the appellants were correctly convicted of robbery with aggravating circumstances, conspiracy, and statutory offences under the Explosives Act and Riotous Assemblies Act, based on overwhelming evidence including corroborated witness testimony and forensic analysis. However, convictions for unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition were set aside as the doctrine of common purpose does not extend to possession offences without proof of joint possession. The trial was found to be fair, with no failure of justice or bias. The compensation order under section 300 of the C…
Source excerpt
Lunga and Others v S (A250/2023) [2024] ZAWCHC 259 (20 May 2024)
The Court found that the State failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the first to third appellants jointly possessed the firearms and ammunition. Mere knowledge or acquiescence to the use of firearms during the robbery does not satisfy the requirements for joint possession. The convictions and sentences on counts 4 and 5 for the first to third appellants were set aside. Regarding sentencing on count 2, the trial court found substantial and compelling circumstances to deviate from the prescribed minimum sentence but nevertheless imposed the minimum sentence, which was a material misdire…
Source excerpt
Gxasheka and Others v S (A58/22) [2024] ZAWCHC 34 (9 February 2024)
The High Court dismissed an appeal by four accused convicted of conspiracy to commit robbery, firearm and ammunition offences, and housebreaking.
S v Motaung and Another (SS54/2016) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1512 (20 November 2023)
Sentencing judgment in a violent robbery and murder case. Both accused received life imprisonment for murder, with additional concurrent and cumulative terms for related offences.
Ngcobo and Others v S - Appeal (A207/23) [2023] ZAWCHC 272 (3 November 2023)
High Court appeal against refusal of bail dismissed. The court held that the alleged planned armed robbery and public safety risks justified continued detention.
S v Khumalo and Another (SS 8/2023) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1326 (2 November 2023)
Sentencing judgment for murder, robbery and firearm offences. The court found no substantial and compelling reasons to depart from mandatory minimum sentences.
S v Mabena and Others (CC2/2020) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1189 (19 September 2023)
High Court criminal conviction arising from a planned cash-in-transit robbery, a police shootout, and firearms-related offences.
S v Gcuwa and Others (CC15/2019) [2022] ZAECQBHC 28 (7 September 2022)
The court considered the seriousness of the offences, the prescribed minimum sentences, and the personal circumstances of each accused. For accused 1 and 2, despite their dominant roles and the gravity of the offences, factors such as their ages, status as first offenders (except accused 2), four years of pretrial detention, and prospects of rehabilitation constituted substantial and compelling circumstances justifying deviation from the minimum sentences. Accused 3's role was limited to providing information, with no physical involvement or benefit from the robbery, and she accepted responsi…
Source excerpt
Explore more
