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
October 1962
Arthur v Bezuidenhout and Another (183/61) [1962] ZASCA 12 (29 October 1962) Plaintiffs proved defendant's negligence; res ipsa loquitur raises an inference but does not shift the burden of proof. Motor-vehicle collision; res ipsa loquitur — inference of negligence but no shift of legal burden; inevitable accident defence; allocation of onus of proof; evaluation of conflicting expert metallurgical evidence; importance of proper trial record and marking of exhibits.	29 October 1962
Shangase v S (101/1962) [1962] ZASCA 3 (10 October 1962) Formal defects and some trial irregularities did not vitiate conviction; municipal cancellation notice and regulations were valid. Criminal procedure – charge defects – formal inaccuracies not fatal where substance clear; refusal of adjournment – irregular but not prejudicial absent miscarriage; limits on cross‑examination and recall – within judicial discretion; evidence – admissibility of administrative file cover; concurrent prosecutions – undesirable but not necessarily prejudicial; administrative law – notice cancelling residential permit under municipal regulations valid if fair opportunity and appeal provisions exist; regulations – failure to translate/posting does not automatically invalidate regulations; audi alteram partem satisfied where appeal and suspensive procedures provided.	10 October 1962
June 1962
Markham v South African Finance & Industrial Co Ltd (16/62) [1962] ZASCA 6 (8 June 1962) Approval of company accounts can interrupt prescription for a director-creditor only if the acknowledgement is, in effect, made to that creditor. Prescription — Prescription Act 18 of 1943 s.6(1)(a) — "acknowledgement by the debtor" construed to require acknowledgement to creditor or agent; corporate balance-sheet entries and adoption of accounts may constitute admission by company but only interrupt prescription in favour of a particular creditor where the act is done as between debtor and that creditor — application to directors' fees included in company accounts.	8 June 1962
May 1962
Estate Furman and Another and another v Commissioner for Inland Revenue (5/1962) [1962] ZASCA 2 (28 May 1962) Allotments of shares at the instance of the deceased can be deemed donations for estate duty; donations-tax effective date not incorporated. Estate duty — s 3(3)(c)(iii) Estate Duty Act read with s 3(4)(a) — corporate allotment of shares at instance of deceased — deemed donation where fair market value exceeds consideration; Income Tax Act s 54(2) deeming incorporated only to create fictitious donation, not to import donations-tax provisions or effective date; "disposition" includes allotment of shares; Kohler authority applicable.	28 May 1962
Dannert (Pty.) Lafrenz Limited v Dempers (22/62) [1962] ZASCA 8 (11 May 1962) Sale of a stock-in-trade with price fixed by agreed method at delivery is enforceable; absence of express tender not fatal. Sale — sale of a mass/corpus (stock-in-trade) — certainty of merx where mass described by general description; Sale — price (pretium) to be fixed by agreed method at delivery — sufficient certainty for enforceable (conditional) sale; Civil procedure — pleading — requirement of tender of delivery — demand letter and claim for delivery may suffice; Pleadings — ambiguity resolved by reading declaration and further particulars as a whole.	11 May 1962
Button and Another v Jones (12/62) [1962] ZASCA 5 (10 May 1962) Ancillary duties to secure an unenforceable sweepstake contract are not legally enforceable; the exception was upheld. * Contract law – implied terms – ancillary duties to secure performance of a contract – unenforceable where main contract is gambling/sweepstake. * Public policy – gambling contracts (sweepstakes) unenforceable; courts will not enforce ancillary obligations aimed at facilitating unlawful or unenforceable transactions. * Delict/agency – no separate enforceable duty owed by agents with knowledge of sweepstake rules when duty exists only to effect an unenforceable contract.	10 May 1962
Heslop v General Accident Fire and Life Assurance Corporation Limited (11/1962) [1962] ZASCA 4 (10 May 1962) An express proposal-form warranty of fact binds the proposer even if she was unaware of the named driver’s prior conviction. • Insurance law – proposal answers incorporated into policy as basis of contract and condition precedent; warranty; • Warranty – whether answers constitute warranty of fact or of proposer’s knowledge; • Materiality – previous convictions of a named driver relevant to risk assessment; • Duty to inquire – proposer bound by unequivocal answer even if unaware of facts.	10 May 1962
S v Mali (19/62) [1962] ZASCA 7 (3 May 1962) Convicted for theft of a goat on credible identification evidence; court reserved key procedural questions on review power and competence to retry and granted leave to appeal. * Criminal law – theft of livestock – identification by ear-marks and possession of carcass – credibility and conviction. * Criminal procedure – review jurisdiction – whether a Supreme Court reviewing judge may set aside a magistrate's competent sentence and order conversion into a preparatory examination. * Criminal procedure – competence to retry – whether a higher court may try an accused after magistrate conviction and sentence. * Sentencing – application of section 334quat(2)(b) (imprisonment for prevention of crime) where accused has multiple prior convictions.	3 May 1962
March 1962
Goosen v S (9/1962) [1962] ZASCA 1 (31 March 1962) Convictions based primarily on accomplice testimony are unsafe without corroboration implicating the accused. Criminal law – accomplice evidence – cautionary rule and need for corroboration implicating accused; corroboration must connect accused to the crime; admissions of gratuities may be innocent and not necessarily corroborative; circumstantial proximity evidence insufficient without more.	31 March 1962
Dermot Properties (Proprietary) Limited v City Council of Johannesburg (174/61) [1962] ZASCA 11 (26 March 1962) Whether 40% coverage is calculated against the whole erf or only the General Residential zoned portion. Town planning — Interpretation of town‑planning scheme as an integrated instrument — Use zoning and density (coverage) provisions read together — Definition of "site" confined to area within relevant use zone — Coverage calculated against portion zoned General Residential, not entire erf.	26 March 1962
Mtoleni and Others v S (27/1962) [1962] ZASCA 10 (19 March 1962) Appellants' challenge to witness credibility and accomplice status rejected; trial court's findings and convictions upheld. Criminal law – accomplice evidence and cautionary rule – presence under threat not automatically making witness an accomplice; appellate review of trial court credibility findings – deference where trial judge applied careful assessment; effect of inconsistencies explained by interpretation and memory lapses.	19 March 1962
January 1962
Mgxulwa v S (25/1962) [1962] ZASCA 9 (21 January 1962) Conviction for poisoning set aside due to unreliable witness evidence and insufficient proof of appellant's guilt. Criminal law — Murder by poisoning — Reliance on single principal witness with conflicting statements — Need for reliable corroboration — Credibility of an accessory witness under arrest — Proof beyond reasonable doubt — Acquittal where conviction unsafe.	21 January 1962