Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search
background image

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/
9 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
9 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
March 1969
Mathebula and Another v S (14/69) [1969] ZASCA 11 (31 March 1969)
Possession and identification evidence plus common-purpose foresight upheld robbery and murder convictions; appeals dismissed.
Criminal law – Robbery and murder – Possession of stolen property as evidence – Complainant identification – Trial court credibility findings – Common purpose/joint enterprise – Foresight of possibility of death.
 31 March 1969
Terblanche v S (3/69) [1969] ZASCA 12 (31 Maart 1969)
Appeal dismissed: calm confession and circumstantial evidence show deliberate murder, not mitigating provocation.
Criminal law – Murder – Provocation and mitigation – Whether heat of passion reduces culpability – Confession and circumstantial evidence indicating deliberation and intent; multiple stab wounds.
 31 March 1969
Minister van Landboukrediet en Grondbesit v McDonald (2/69) [1969] ZASCA 22 (27 Maart 1969)
Court may refuse late acceptance of money paid into court; discretion exercised by balancing mistake, change of circumstances and prejudice.
Civil procedure – Rule 34 payment into court – Court’s discretion to authorise payment out after prescribed period – Relevant considerations: mistake, fraud, change of circumstances, prejudice and conduct of parties – Interaction with statutory compensation procedure (Expropriation Act).
 27 March 1969
South African Associated Newspapers Limited and Another v Yutar (147/68) [1969] ZASCA 40 (26 March 1969)
A prominent publication accusing a prosecutor of deliberately misleading the court was defamatory; justification and fair-comment defences failed.
Defamation — meaning of words — whether 'misled the court' implies deliberate deception; justification (truth) — burden and contextual interpretation; fair comment — distinction between factual allegation (poster) and opinion; assessment of damages — aggravating factors, wide circulation, repetition, persistence by publisher.
 26 March 1969
Isaacs v S (195/68) [1969] ZASCA 38 (25 Maart 1969)
Appeal allowed: conviction and sentence set aside due to unreliable witness evidence and failure to investigate police coercion.
Criminal law – Appeal – Unsafe conviction – Voluntariness and admissibility of statements – Reliability of prison informant and child witness – Police coercion or inducement – Duty of trial court to investigate material allegations – Miscarriage of justice.
 25 March 1969
Suliman v S (71/68) [1969] ZASCA 48 (20 March 1969)
A judge’s bona fide recusal, even if mistaken, does not automatically cause a failure of justice.
Criminal procedure – judicial recusal – bona fide recusal by presiding judge – objectively inadequate grounds do not automatically amount to irregularity causing failure of justice – special entry (s.364) – requirement of demonstrated prejudice to fairness of trial (s.369 proviso).
 20 March 1969
Golby v Secretary for Inland Revenue (105/68) [1969] ZASCA 53 (12 March 1969)
Taxpayer’s unsupported estimates of travel and business expenses insufficient; loans were investment, not money‑lending business; appeal dismissed.
Income tax — deduction claims — burden of proof — taxpayer must prove expenditure ‘‘actually incurred’’ and ‘‘not of a capital nature’’ — distinction between investor and money‑lender — travel expenses between home/place of employment and place of business ordinarily private; expenditure to create or protect capital asset capital in nature.
 12 March 1969
Masuku v S (197/68) [1969] ZASCA 39 (6 Maart 1969)
Accomplice testimony and corroborative evidence sustained robbery conviction; appeal dismissed and sentences affirmed.
Criminal law – Murder and robbery with aggravating circumstances – Accomplice evidence and corroboration – Credibility of accused as witness – Acquittal of co-accused does not necessarily vitiate conviction of another where corroborated evidence implicates him.
 6 March 1969
Badenhorst en Andere v Chambers (141/68) [1969] ZASCA 54 (4 Maart 1969)
Whether a 1905 deed created a servitude granting half the stream and whether a 1937 apportionment preserved that servitude.
Water law — servitude of water — interpretation of historic subdivision and servitude deeds — whether deed granted one‑half of stream or mere right to lead water; Water Court apportionment (1937) — “subject to any servitudes that exist” — effect on pre‑existing servitudes; entitlement to permanent pipeline servitude; riparian rights and statutory context.
 4 March 1969