Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa

The Supreme Court of Appeal is, except in respect of certain labour and competition matters, the second highest court in South Africa. In terms of the Constitution, it is purely an appeal court and may decide only appeals and issues connected with appeals. (Banner image by Ben Bezuidenhout).

Physical address

Cnr Mirriam Makeba & President Brand Streets, Bloemfontein, Free State, 9301

Visit website

https://www.supremecourtofappeal.org.za/

12 judgments

Advanced search

All years

All months

Filters

Sort by:

12 judgments

Citation	Judgment date
May 1958
Attorney-General of Transvaal v Flats Milling Co (Pty)Ltd and Others (227/57) [1958] ZASCA 34 (22 May 1958) Appeal dismissed: s.105(1) appeals limited to legal decisions affecting conviction; academic questions need not be decided. Criminal procedure; Magistrates' Courts Act ss.104–105 — scope of Attorney‑General’s appeal — appeal lies only where court a quo decided in favour of accused on a matter of law; appellate courts need not decide academic questions of law; Court may consult trial record beyond case stated when necessary; prosecutor’s factual concession may justify acquittal	22 May 1958
R v Kinnear (210/57) [1958] ZASCA 33 (20 Mei 1958) Proved claims presented in prescribed sworn form and adopted by the trustee suffice under s.146 to sustain convictions for pre-sequestration debts. Insolvency Act – s.135(3)(a) – contracting debts within six months before sequestration – evidential presumption under s.146 – proved claims (sworn forms) presented and signed at creditors’ meeting sufficient to prove debts; Ahmed v. Regina distinguished where only a schedule, not the admitted claims, was produced.	20 May 1958
Marx v Lambrecht (243/57) [1958] ZASCA 32 (19 May 1958) A give-and-take line fixed under the Fencing Act is deemed the boundary for Act purposes and successors cannot unilaterally remove the fence. Fencing Act 17 of 1912 — s.32 give-and-take line deemed boundary for purposes of the Act — dividing fence attracts reciprocal rights and liabilities attaching to registered owners — such rights may run with the land — successor may not unilaterally remove or alter fence — disputes referable to arbitration under s.26 and Third Schedule — overruling Hansen v Venter.	19 May 1958
O'Neill v South African ARilways and Harbours Administration (253/57) [1958] ZASCA 31 (19 May 1958) An acquittal bars departmental punishment only where the misconduct would in law be the same offence as that acquitted. Administrative law – disciplinary proceedings after criminal acquittal; interpretation of s.16(5) Railways and Harbours Service Act; autrefois acquit vs res judicata; Neethling v South African Railways applied.	19 May 1958
R v Moloi (25/58) [1958] ZASCA 29 (19 May 1958) Tentative identification plus circumstantial plate‑removal evidence did not prove the appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Criminal law – Identification evidence – Tentative or uncertain identification insufficient to sustain conviction. Criminal law – Circumstantial evidence – Removal of number plate shortly before offence insufficient, without more, to prove complicity. Criminal law – Child witness – Uncontradicted evidence of presence and conduct may be admissible but must be tested against requirement to exclude reasonable inferences of innocence. Criminal law – Standard of proof – Proven facts must exclude reasonable inferences other than guilt (Rex v Blom).	19 May 1958
Vulcan Rubber Works (Pty) Ltd v South African ARilway and Harbours (60/57) [1958] ZASCA 30 (19 May 1958) Owner failed to prove defendant’s possession or retention of 42 bales after notice; appeal dismissed with costs. Property — vindicatory action — proof of possession and alternative claim for value — onus on owner to prove possession at time of action or that defendant parted with possession after notification; Presumption of continuance — inference of fact, not presumption of law; Evidence — hearsay reports of investigations admissible only to show enquiries made and fruitless, not to prove primary facts; Pleadings — counsel’s opening does not amend pleadings or narrow issues.	19 May 1958
De Villiers and Others v Barnard and Others (168/57) [1958] ZASCA 28 (12 May 1958) Non‑riparian land irrigated before 1906 may continue to use water for present and future reasonable irrigation needs ("extensive user"). Irrigation law – intermittent (flood) streams – interpretation of s.8(1906)/s.24(1912) and regs.117–119/25–27 – preservation of prior irrigation rights on non‑riparian land – "extensive user" (present and future reasonable requirements) v. "limited user" (quantity actually used before 1906); effect of protection procedure (ss.15–16) and relationship with Water Court permits; servitude rights and limits on diversion works.	12 May 1958
R v Samuels (44/58) [1958] ZASCA 27 (12 May 1958) Appeal against death sentence for rape dismissed; appellate interference confined to misdirection or shockingly unreasonable exercise of discretion. Criminal law – Sentencing – Appeal against severity – Appellate interference limited to misdirection, capriciousness, wrong principle or shockingly unreasonable exercise of discretion; rape – role of prior convictions and habitual-criminal statutory scheme limiting sentencing alternatives; relevance of complainant’s character and status.	12 May 1958
R v Lewis (39/58) [1958] ZASCA 25 (8 May 1958) The appellant's intoxication did not negate intent to kill when he manually compressed the victim's throat during attempted sexual assault. Criminal law – Murder – application of manual pressure to throat during attempted sexual assault – whether intent to kill established; death by strangulation or carotid occlusion – fortuitous anatomical consequence incidental to dangerous act; voluntary intoxication and effect on mens rea.	8 May 1958
R v Phiri (248/57) [1958] ZASCA 26 (8 May 1958) Appeal allowed: murder conviction reduced to culpable homicide where Crown evidence was unreliable but appellant exceeded lawful self‑defence. Criminal law – murder v. culpable homicide – adequacy of Crown proof beyond reasonable doubt – appellate review of credibility. Criminal law – private/self‑defence – limits of lawful defence where escape was possible. Criminal procedure – failure to call defence witnesses – adverse inference only if availability established.	8 May 1958
R v Ngcobo (237/57) [1958] ZASCA 24 (2 May 1958) Acquitted of attempted murder but convicted of assault with intent to rob based on identification and circumstantial evidence. Criminal law – assault with intent to rob – identification evidence (facial features and clothing) – danger of identification fortified by enquiries – circumstantial evidence and presence in company – benefit of doubt on facial ID but conviction on combined evidence; sentencing influenced by prior convictions.	2 May 1958
Masoka v R (265/57) [1958] ZASCA 23 (1 May 1958) (Leave to Appeal) Leave to appeal granted over potentially excessive sentence and possible error in considering an acquitted assault during proceedings. Criminal procedure — leave to appeal — conviction based on credibility findings — sentence severity for a first offender — appellate interference possible — consideration of conduct acquitted on related charge	1 May 1958