General Law Amendment Act, 1955

Act 62 of 1955

There are outstanding amendments that have not yet been applied. See the History tab for more information.

General Law Amendment Act, 1955

Citation: Act 62 of 1955
Date: 6 July 1955
Language: English
Publication: Download PDF (1.0 MB)

Error loading PDF

Try reloading the page or downloading the PDF.

Reload page Download PDF

Error:

History of this document

23 March 2001 amendment not yet applied

Amended by Judicial Matters Amendment Act, 2000

05 June 1998 amendment not yet applied

Amended by Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act, 1998

01 April 1997 amendment not yet applied

Amended by Justice Laws Rationalisation Act, 1996

06 October 1995 amendment not yet applied

Amended by State of Emergency Act, 1995

01 April 1978 amendment not yet applied

Amended by Liquor Act, 1977

22 July 1977 amendment not yet applied

Amended by Criminal Procedure Act, 1977

01 December 1970 amendment not yet applied

Amended by Prescription Act, 1969

01 July 1969 amendment not yet applied

Amended by Gambling Act, 1965

02 October 1967 amendment not yet applied

Amended by Administration of Estates Act, 1965

24 June 1964 amendment not yet applied

Amended by General Law Amendment Act, 1964

01 January 1960 amendment not yet applied

Amended by Supreme Court Act, 1959

12 April 1957 amendment not yet applied

Amended by Sexual Offences Act, 1957

06 July 1955 this version

Published in Government Gazette 5512

Commenced

Note: Date of commencement of whole Act, except sections 1-3 which were subsequently repealed.

23 June 1955

Assented to

Cited documents 0

Documents citing this one 167

Judgment

107

Head of Department : Mpumalanga Department of Education and Another v Hoërskool Ermelo and Another [2009] ZACC 32 (14 October 2009)

Reported

HoD may withdraw a governing body's language function on reasonable grounds but may not invoke s25 to appoint an interim committee.

Education law; language policy — interpretation of "function" in sections 22 and 25 of the South African Schools Act; HoD may withdraw a governing body's function on reasonable grounds under s22 but may not invoke s25 to appoint an interim committee unless the governing body has ceased or failed to perform its functions; procedural fairness and constitutional obligations (s29(2)) in language policy decisions.

S v Manamela and Another (CCT 25/99) [2000] ZACC 5 (14 April 2000)

Reported

Reverse onus in s37(1) unjustifiably displaces presumption of innocence; converted to an evidential presumption instead.

* Criminal law – possession of stolen goods – section 37(1) General Law Amendment Act – reverse onus requiring accused to prove reasonable cause – compatibility with right to silence and presumption of innocence. * Constitutional law – limitation analysis under section 36 – restriction of right to silence may be justified but displacing presumption of innocence by a legal onus is disproportionate. * Remedy – reading-in to convert legal burden into evidential presumption that raises a reasonable doubt; conditional non-retrospectivity.

Savoi and Others v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Another [2014] ZACC 5 (20 March 2014)

Reported

Applicants’ constitutional challenges to POCA’s definitions, evidentiary provision and retrospectivity dismissed; High Court’s severance not confirmed.

Criminal law – Prevention of Organised Crime Act – Definitions: "pattern of racketeering activity" and "enterprise" – vagueness and overbreadth challenge dismissed; Evidence – s 2(2) POCA permits otherwise inadmissible hearsay, similar-fact and previous-conviction evidence subject to proviso preserving fair trial – admissibility assessed case-by-case; Retrospectivity – Chapter 2 not retrospective as conviction requires post-enactment pattern; Fault element – phrase "ought reasonably to have known" denotes negligence standard and is constitutionally valid; Standing and abstract challenges – permissible but carry heavy burden.

Brits v Minister of Police and Another (756/2020) [2021] ZASCA 161 (23 November 2021)

Arrest without an objectively reasonable suspicion was unlawful; Minister vicariously liable; R70,000 awarded for unlawful arrest and detention.

* Delict – unlawful arrest and detention – requirement of a reasonable suspicion under s 40(1)(b) and s 40(1)(e) CPA – objective test for reasonable suspicion (Mabona). * Criminal procedure – "found in possession" – constructive possession and possession through an agent; limits of imputing possession. * Vicarious liability – employer (Minister of Police) liable for wrongful acts of officer within course and scope of employment. * Quantum – awards for unlawful arrest/detention; damages and costs for short-term detention.

Osman and Another v Attorney-General for the Transvaal [1998] ZACC 14 (23 September 1998)

Reported

Section 36 does not violate the interim Constitution's rights to silence or the presumption of innocence.

* Criminal law – Possession of goods reasonably suspected to be stolen – s36 GLAA 62 of 1955 – requirement to give satisfactory account is an element of the offence. * Constitutional law – Interim Constitution s25(2)(c) and s25(3)(c) – right against self‑incrimination, presumption of innocence and right to silence – statute does not compel confession nor shift onus. * Transitional constitutional application – item 17, Schedule 6 (1996 Constitution) – interim Constitution governs pending proceedings absent interests of justice. * Burden of proof – State retains duty to prove all elements beyond reasonable doubt. * Court composition – quorum met despite one judge's inability to participate.

S v Mothwa (124/2015) [2015] ZASCA 143 (1 October 2015)

Three-day possession of a stolen vehicle and lack of investigative verification defeated proof of robbery; conviction set aside.

Criminal law – robbery with aggravating circumstances; doctrine of recent possession; sufficiency of proof; temporal gap between theft and possession; police investigation and verification of explanations; substitution on competent verdicts.

Kruger v S (506/2011) [2011] ZASCA 219 (29 November 2011)

Reported

Appellate court reduced and antedated sentences after finding cumulative term disproportionate and pre-trial detention uncredited.

* Sentencing — cumulative effect of multiple sentences — appellate interference where sentence disproportionately harsh. * Sentencing — credit for pre-trial detention — antedating sentences as appropriate remedy. * Sentencing — discretion of trial court; appeal available where material misdirection or shockingly inappropriate sentence (S v Malgas; S v Pillay). * Sentencing — concurrency and consideration of previous convictions and personal circumstances.

Minister of Safety and Security and Others v Ndlovu (788/2011) [2012] ZASCA 189 (30 November 2012)

Reported

A reception court’s routine remand without judicial inquiry does not validate continued unlawful detention.

Unlawful arrest and detention; reception court remand; need for judicial enquiry at first appearance; burden on State to justify deprivation of liberty; evidentiary shortcomings; damages for unlawful detention.

Ivanov v North West Gambling Board and Others (312/2011) [2012] ZASCA 92 (31 May 2012)

Reported

A set‑aside search warrant renders prior search and seizure unlawful and spoliation restores possession despite illegal possession.

Search warrants — invalidity — declaration operates retrospectively; search and seizure under set‑aside warrant unlawful ex tunc; mandament van spolie — possession and unlawful deprivation suffice irrespective of illegality of possession; warrants judicial not administrative acts; procedural non‑compliance with notice to organs of state may affect costs but does not bar substantive spoliation relief.

Makhokha v S [2019] ZACC 19 (3 May 2019)

Reported

Non-parole period exceeding statutory limit and ordering a determinate sentence to run after life imprisonment were unlawful.

* Criminal procedure – sentencing – non-parole period – validity and limits under s 276B(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act; constitutional right against arbitrary deprivation of freedom (s 12(1)(a)). * Correctional Services Act s 39(2)(a)(i) – relation between determinate sentences and life imprisonment; competence to order consecutive operation. * Remedy – setting aside unlawful non-parole and consecutive-running orders; antedating determinate sentence to date of sentence.