Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa - 1964

Sort by:

9 judgments

Citation	Judgment date
December 1964
Secretary for Inland Revenue v Sturrock Sugar Farms (Pty) Limited (184/64) [1964] ZASCA 3 (3 December 1964) Whether a grower’s sugar quota forms part of land's value for transfer duty when owned with the quota land. Transfer duty — valuation of immovable property — nature and effect of sugar quota under Sugar Act and Sugar Industry Agreement — whether a grower’s quota held by the landowner is part of land’s market value or a separate asset — construction of Clause 36(b)(i) (meaning of "transfer").	3 December 1964
Isaaks v S (252/64) [1964] ZASCA 4 (1 Desember 1964) Murder conviction affirmed; death sentence set aside pending inquiry into mitigating circumstances, notably possible minority. Criminal law – Murder – Evidence and credibility – Conviction supported by eyewitness and medical evidence; Sentencing – Necessity for express findings on mitigating circumstances (including possible minority) before imposing death sentence; Appellate remedy – remit for re‑sentencing where record lacks mitigation findings.	1 December 1964
November 1964
Hlapezula and Others v S (128/64) [1964] ZASCA 1 (26 November 1964) Independent accomplice testimony, properly scrutinised, can safely support convictions; sentences upheld as not shockingly severe. Criminal law – accomplice evidence – cautionary rule and corroboration; alibi assessment against totality of evidence and witness demeanour; appellate review of sentence – discretion and shock test; armed housebreaking and theft with aggravating circumstances.	26 November 1964
May 1964
Rubinstein v S (31/64) [1964] ZASCA 2 (30 May 1964) Conviction under s.36 (Act 62/1955) upheld: appellant's effective control and circumstances justified possession, suspicion goods stolen, and four-year sentence. Criminal law – Possession – Section 36, Act 62 of 1955 – "Found in possession" and "reasonable suspicion" must be proved; effective control of premises can establish possession; quantity, novelty and storage of drugs in residential flat may furnish reasonable grounds to suspect theft; sentencing under s.36 may be up to theft penalties but must reflect case circumstances.	30 May 1964
Suid-Afrikaanse Naturelletrust v Kitchener en Andere (162/63) [1964] ZASCA 5 (18 Mei 1964) Appeal upheld in part: trial valuation upheld generally but solatium must be reconsidered; interest refused; awards adjusted. Expropriation/Compensation — valuation of expropriated agricultural land — market value to be assessed by reference to realistic purchaser profile, subdivision potential and irrigation prospects; comparables and expert evidence weigh but do not control; solatium under s.13(5) requires proof of special circumstances; no automatic interest from date of expropriation; appellate correction limited where trial judge’s evaluative findings are sustainable.	18 May 1964
Smit v Rondalia Versekeringskorporasie van Suid-Afrika Beperk (242/63) [1964] ZASCA 6 (14 Mei 1964) Whether insurer’s denial of liability for further repairs triggered the policy’s forfeiture clause and barred the insured’s delayed claim. Insurance — interpretation of forfeiture clause — insurer’s denial of liability — effect of agent’s subsequent undertaking to remedy defective repairs — three‑month forfeiture and twelve‑month limitation provisions.	14 May 1964
March 1964
Derek v S (245/63) [1964] ZASCA 8 (17 Maart 1964) Whether statutory tests and certified prior convictions obliged declaration of appellant as a habitual criminal. Criminal law — habitual criminal declaration — section 335(2)(c) Criminal Procedure Act 56/1955 — effect of amended Fifth Schedule rule (ten‑year provision) — admissibility and sufficiency of S.A.P. 69B/section 303bis certificate — treatment of multiple counts/convictions — mandatory declaration where statutory thresholds met.	17 March 1964
Tsilo v S (157/63) [1964] ZASCA 9 (9 Maart 1964) Appeal allowed: single youthful intoxicated witness insufficient; alibi not disproved by failure to call corroborator; conviction unsafe. Criminal law – sufficiency of evidence – reliance on a single youthful and intoxicated witness – credibility and delay in reporting; Alibi – accused’s duty to call corroborative witnesses; Appeal – unsafe conviction where principal evidence unreliable.	9 March 1964
Kearney v S (117/63) [1964] ZASCA 7 (5 March 1964) Confessions and company records admissible; convictions and sentence for large-scale estate misappropriation upheld. Criminal law — admissibility of confessions — voluntariness and inducement; privilege — statement to attorney where accused was witness and client waived privilege; business records admissible under s381(6)(b); corroboration of confession under s258(2); variance in charge cured under s180(4); indictment amended under s381(5).	5 March 1964