Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
S v Friedman [1] is an important case in South African law. It was heard in the Witwatersrand Local Division by Cloete J from 9 to 13 October 1995, with judgment handed down on 16 October. AO Cook and DN Unterhalter appeared for the accused, and ZH de Beer and H. Louw for the state. The case is especially significant for South African criminal law.
R v Viljoen [1] is an important case in South African law. It was heard in the Appellate Division on 23 April 1941, with judgment handed down on 6 May. De Wet CJ, Watermeyer JA, Tindall JA, Centlivres JA, and Feetham JA presided.
South African criminal law is the body of national law relating to crime in South Africa.In the definition of Van der Walt et al., a crime is "conduct which common or statute law prohibits and expressly or impliedly subjects to punishment remissible by the state alone and which the offender cannot avoid by his own act once he has been convicted."
The Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture, Corruption and Fraud in the Public Sector including Organs of State (State Capture Inquiry) was established in January 2018 to investigate allegations of state capture and political corruption under the administration of Jacob Zuma, who was President of South Africa from May 2009 to February 2018.
This page was last edited on 7 February 2024, at 23:39 (UTC).; Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License; additional terms may apply.
S v Francis is an important case in South African criminal law. It deals with that subdivision of the principle of legality known as the ius acceptum rule in statutory crimes: the rule stipulating that a court may convict an accused of a crime only if the type of act which he committed is recognised by the law—in this instance the statutory law as a crime.
S v Zinn, [1] an important case in South African criminal law, was heard in the Appellate Division by Steyn CJ, Ogilvie Thompson JA and Rumpff JA on March 21, 1969, with judgment handed down on March 31. H. Snitcher QC appeared for the appellant; for the state, AJ Lategan.
S v Mokgethi en Andere [1] is an important case in South African law, with the court's determination that, in general, a perpetrator's action, which is a sine qua non for the death of the deceased, is too remote from the result to give rise to criminal liability if