Criminal(Law(5ed(summary(notes:!

Nicholas)Brodie)

INTRODUCTION)
• Criminal(law"is"a"brunch"of"national"law"that"defines"“crime”"and"provides"repercussions"for"
committing"a"crime."Natural"law"is"broken"up"into"‘Procedural"law’"and"‘substantive"law.’"""""
1)"Procedural"law"are"the"rules"that"enforce"substantive"law,"e.g."criminal/civil"procedure"""""""
2)"Substantive"law"is"further"divided"into"(i)"public"law:"between"individual"&"state,"e.g."tax,"
criminal,"admin"laws,"&"(ii)"private"law:"between"individuals,"e.g."family,"contract"laws."
• A"‘crime’"is"conduct"which"is"legally"forbidden"which"is"put"into"place"&"enforced"by"state."

Crime( Delict(
Investigator"="state,"Complainant"="3rd"party." Complainant"="plaintiff."
State"must"investigate"&"prosecute." Individual"can"choose"to"sue."
Directed"in"public"interest." Directed"against"individual."
Purpose"is"to"punish"for"society." Purpose"is"to"compensate."
Beyond"a"reasonable"doubt"standard"of" Balance"of"probability"standard"of"proof."
proof"as"criminal"law"favours"liberty."
• Fundamental(principles:" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""
1)"Favour"Liberty:"where"the"law"is"unclear/ambigious"you"must"favour"liberty"&"give"benefit"
of"the"doubt." " " " " " " " " " """"""""""
2)"There"is"no"crime"without"law,"nullem&cimen&sine&lege.& & & & &&&&&&&&&&&
3)"There"is"no"punishment"without"law,"nullem&poena&sine&lege.""
• Punishment:"can"only"occur"if"a"crime"existed"before"the"act,"statutory"crimes"should"be"
clear"with"clear"repercussions,"common"law"crimes"should"be"clearly"defined"&"settled,"
criminal"law"should"be"accessible."Punishment"is"found"in"two"different"theories"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
1)(Absolute/retributive"theory"believes"that"a"crime"is"an"end"in"itself,"or"just"deserts,"it"is"a"
backward"looking"theory"&"corrects"the"legal"balance"that"was"disturbed"by"the"crime"
through"retribution"by"means"of"punishment." " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""
2)"Relative/utilitarian"theory"believes"that"punishment"must"lead"to"another"end.""""""""""""""""""
(i)"Preventative"theory:"stop"the"crime"happening"again,"reinforcing"a"law"abiding"society.""
(ii)"Deterrent"theory:"to"deter"others"that"see"punishment"happening"but"does"this"work?""""""""""""
(iii)"Rehabilitation"theory:"to"reform"the"criminals,"better"for"younger"criminals.""
• In"order"to"find"a"person"guilty"of"a"crime"that"must"fulfil"the"‘Actus&Reus’&&"‘Mens&Rea’"
elements"of"a"crime."
• Actus&reus"is"made"up"of"Conduct;"Causation;"Voluntariness;"Unlawfulness."These"are"the"
conduct"elements"of"the"crime."The"mind"is"not"taken"into"account"in"this"section."
• Mens&rea"is"made"up"of"Fault/Blameworhtiness;"Capacity."These"are"the"mental"elements"to"
a"crime."The"action"is"not"taken"into"account"in"this"section."

CONDUCT)
Guilty"thoughts"must"show"themselves"in"conduct,"thoughts"are"not"illegal"as"1)"it"is"impossible"to"
prove"a"mental"state."2)"It"is"impossible"to"punish"all"people"who"have"guilty"thoughts."3)"Criminal"

1"
"
law"favours"liberty"&"cannot"punish"for"day"dreams"that"do"not"result"in"conduct."4)"How"do"we"
distinguish"between"thought"&"intent?"

Commissions:(are"positive"acts"of"HUMAN"conduct,"there"is"an"exception"to"this"of"juristic"people,"
e.g."companies,"where"a"director"acts"for"them."Commissions"are"divided"into"two"categories:"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
(1)"Circumstance"crimes:"a"certain"type"of"conduct"or"‘state"of"affairs’"is"prohibited"irrespective"of"
the"end"result,"e.g."drunk"driving,"possession"of"narcotics."" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" " """""""""""
(2)"Consequence"Crimes:"the"end"result"of"a"specific"conduct"is"prohibited,"e.g."murder,"culpable"
homicide." " " " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""
(NB)"Vicarious"Liability:"where"a"person"who"did"not"commit"the"offence"is"held"liable"for"the"act"of"
another,"there"must"always"be"a"person"who"acted"wrongly/negligently,"e.g."selling"alcohol"to"a"
minor,"the"bartender"committed"the"conduct"but"the"owner"will"suffer"the"penalties."

Case:"R"v"Achterdam"1911" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(State"of"affairs."" " " " "" " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Facts:"A"was"found"drunk"in"a"constable’s"garden"after"deciding"to"sleep"in"the"private"property"while"
walking"down"the"street,"drunk.""The"constable"kicked"him"off"of"his"property"&"then"arrested"him"
for"being"drunk"in"public."Court"a"quo"found"the"accused"guilty,"however"on"review"it"was"found"that"
the"accused"had"not"created"the"state"of"affairs"himself"&"was"therefore"not"guilty"of"a"circumstance"
crime." " " " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"In"order"to"be"charged"with"a"circumstance"crime"the"accused"must"have"created"the"state"
of"affairs."

Case:"S"v"Brick"1973" " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"State"of"affairs." " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""
Facts:"A"was"convicted"for"having"indecent"materials"on"his"person"that"was"mailed"to"him"from"an"
unknown"person"from"overseas."The"accused"claimed"that"he"did"not"intend"to"use"it"but"was"to"
hand"it"over"to"the"police,"however"he"had"just"got"back"from"a"trip"and"had"not"done"so"yet."He"
applied"for"his"appeal"too"late"and"was"trying"to"make"his"application"valid,"the"judges"held"that"an"
appeal"would"be"unsuccessful"as"1)"having"it"in"his"custody"is"illegal"which"he"satisfied,"2)"A"did"not"
discontinue"holding"the"materials"even"though"he"knew"he"was"in"possession"of"them.(( ((((((((((((((
Principle:"An"accused"that"did"not"create"a"state"of"affairs"will"still"be"liable"if"they"do"not"discontinue"
the"state"of"affairs."

Omissions:(are"negative"acts"where"a"person"fails"to"act"when"they"had"a"duty"to."Omissions"are"not"
always"crimes"and"as"a"general"rule"the"law"does"NOT"impose"a"duty"on"us"to"act"for"another,"in"
particular"if"it"may"endanger"our"own"lives,"“a"person"is"not"under"a"legal"duty"to"protect"another"
from"harm"even"if"they"should"morally"do"so”"(Ewels)"."We"are"autonomous"individuals"responsible"
for"our"own"well"being."

Case:"Minister"of"Police"v"Ewels"1975" " " " " " " """""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Omission"to"act." " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""
Facts:"An"on"duty"police"officer"witnessed"an"offdduty"police"officer"physically"assaulting"a"man,"he"
did"not"however"try"to"stop"the"offdduty"officer."The"court"held"that"the"on"duty"officer"had"a"legal"
duty"to"assist"the"man"being"assaulted." " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"Moral"indignation"is"not"sufficient,"there"must"be"a"legal"duty"to"act"in"order"for"an"
omission"to"be"unlawful."

2"
"
Unlawfulness(test"was"created"in"Ewels"which"asks"“in"the"circumstances"would"the"community"
require"a"legal"conviction"&"duty"to"act.”"

Crystallized(categories(have"been"made"using"the"unlawfulness"principle"in"order"to"help"us"
determine"when"an"omission"can"be"considered"illegal.(

1. Prior(Conduct"states"that"if"you"have"created"a"potentially"dangerous"situation"you"are"
under"a"legal"duty"to"protect"others"from"it,"e.g."if"X"lights"a"fire"in"the"bush.""

Case:"R"v"Miller"1983" " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Prior"conduct." " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""(
Facts:"The"accused"while"squatting"at"another"house"lit"a"cigarette"and"lay"down"on"a"mattress"as"
subsequently"fell"asleep,"the"cigarette"fell"onto"the"mattress"and"the"mattress"started"smouldering"
the"accused"saw"this"and"moved"to"another"room"without"remedying"the"situation."He"was"guilty"for"
his"omission." " " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"If"you"create"a"dangerous"situation"you"are"under"a"legal"duty"to"put"an"end"to"it."

Case:"Halliwell"v"J"Municipal"Council"1912" " " " " " """"""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Prior"conduct.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Facts:(Cobblestone"had"been"placed"on"a"public"road"which"eventually"became"smooth"through"
ware,"a"man’s"was"riding"a"horse"drawn"carriage"&"the"horse"slipped"on"the"smooth"paving"&"he"fell"
from"the"carriage."Court"held"Municipal"Council"guilty"as"they"made"the"prior"conduct"of"laying"the"
stones." " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(If"you"have"created"a"potentially"dangerous"situation"you"are"under"a"legal"duty"to"protect"
others"from"it."

2. Control(of(a(potentially(dangerous(object,"a"person"is"under"a"legal"duty"to"ensure"it"does"
not"cause"harm."The"accused"need"not"be"the"owner"of"the"thing.(

Case:"S"v"Fernandes"1966" " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Omission"to"control"a"potentially"dangerous"thing." " " " """"""""""""""""""
Facts:"The"accused"was"fixing"the"cage"of"a"baboon"&"failed"to"make"sure"the"baboon"was"securely"
restrained,"the"baboon"then"escaped"and"killed"a"baby"boy."The"court"held"the"accused"had"a"legal"
duty"to"make"sure"the"baboon"was"sufficiently"restrained"as"at"all"material"times"the"baboon"was"
under"his"control,"a"reasonable"person"would"have"done"so"&"failure"is"therefore"illegal.""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"Sometime"negligence"can"amount"to"unlawfulness."

Case:"R"v"Eustace"1948" " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Omission"to"control"a"potentially"dangerous"thing." " " " """"""""""""""""""""
Facts:"The"accused"had"a"dog"which"they"failed"to"adequately"control,"the"dog"then"bit"and"killed"
someone,"the"accused"was"convicted"of"culpable"homicide."" " " " """""""""""""""
Principle:(Exception"to"the"rule"that"conduct"has"to"be"performed"by"a"human."

3. Special(Protective(Relationship"is"where"a"person"has"a"special"interest"in"another"that"
imposes"a"duty"on"that"person"to"protect"the"other,"failure"to"do"so"is"unlawful"(Ewels)."
Ewels"above"is"an"example"of"a"special"protective"relationship."

3"
"
Case:"S"v"B"1994" " " " " " " " " """""""""""""""
Deals(with:"A"parent’s"special"protective"relationship"over"their"own"children." """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"Parents(must"try"reasonably"to"save"their"children"from"drowning."

Case:"S"v"A"1993" " " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(A"parent’s"special"protective"relationship"over"their"own"children." " """"""""""""""""""""
Facts:"A"mother"was"held"guilty"for"assault"for"having"failed"to"stop"her"boyfriend"from"assaulting"her"
children." " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"Parents"must"protect"their"children"from"abuse."

Case:"R"v"Chenjere"1960"" " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Teachers"special"protective"relationship"in"respect"of"their"students.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"There"is"a"legal"duty"to"act"in"favour"of"a"child"even"where"the"relationship"is"only"assumed"

Case:"Minister"of"Police"v"Skosana"1960" " " " " " " """""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Police"special"protective"relationship"over"those"in"their"custody." """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Facts:"The"police"had"custody"of"the"deceased"who"was"complaining"of"stomach"cramps"&"asked"to"
be"taken"to"a"doctor,"the"police"failed"to"do"so"fast"enough"and"the"man"died"when"eventually"
reaching"a"hospital."The"court"held"failure"to"get"the"man"to"the"doctor"quick"enough"was"illegal.""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"A"relationship"of"dependence"equates"to"a"special"protective"relationship."

4. Public(office"is"where"someone’s"office"imposes"a"duty"to"act,"then"they"must"do"so,"e.g."
fireman/policeman."The"person"has"to"however"be"on"duty."Ewels"above"is"an"example.(

Case:"S"v"Gaba"1981" " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Police"officers"public"office.((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"group"of"detectives"were"interrogating"a"suspect"to"acquire"information"about"a"gangster"
“the"godfather,”"the"accused"knew"that"this"suspect"was"actually"the"person"they"were"trying"to"get"
information"about"but"he"neglected"to"say"anything."He"was"held"guilty"for"defeating"the"ends"of"
justice,"the"legal"convictions"of"society"would"expect"him"to"have"said"something."""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Public"office"can"make"omissions"illegal."

5. Statute(can"create"a"duty"to"omit"from"doing"something"such"as"a"state"of"affairs."If"you"
create"a"state"of"affairs"it"equates"to"conduct"(Achterdam)."If"you"do"not"discontinue"the"
state"of"affairs"that"you"know"of"it"equates"to"conduct"(Brick)."
6. Contract/common(law/court(order"can"place"a"duty"to"act"when"you"would"not"normally"
have"done"so,"i.e."the"court"may"force"you"to"act"in"favour"of"another."Statute"places"a"duty"
on"all"people"to"report"acts"of"treason"&"domestic"violence."

Case:"S"v"Pitwood"2002" " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:"Contracts"that"create"a"legal"duty." " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""
Facts:"A"man"was"employed"to"close"a"gate"every"time"a"train"passed"through"his"station,"one"day"he"
failed"to"do"so"and"a"number"of"people"were"injured"as"a"result." " " " """"""""""""""""
Principle:"An"employment"contract"can"create"a"duty"so"that"an"omission"to"do"the"job"is"illegal."

VOLUNTARINESS)
In"order"to"prove"conduct"an"act"must"have"been"voluntary,"voluntariness"is"therefore"a"subset"of"
conduct"which"is"predicted"on"freedwill"&"based"of"free"choice.""Things"like"provocation,"

4"
"
hypoglycaemia"(low"blood"sugar),"epilepsy,"concussion"or"hysterical"fits"can"lead"to"a"lack"of"
voluntariness."It"is"not"a"requirement"of"voluntariness"that"the"accused"make"a"rational"decision,"
therefore"a"child"or"mentally"ill"person"can"still"act"voluntarily."

Definition(of"voluntariness"is"‘the"ability"to"subject"ones"bodily"movements"to"one’s"own"conscious"
will.’"For"example"reflex"movements"&"spasms,"unconscious"acts"during"sleep"(somnambulism)"or"
sever"intoxication.""

Absolute(force(is"where"voluntariness"is"completely"negated."For"instance"if"Y"is"chopping"and"X"who"
is"much"bigger"&"stronger"that"Y"grab’s"Y’s"hand"&"directs"it"into"Y’s"chest."

Relative(force(is"where"a"person"can"subject"their"bodily"movements"to"their"own"will,"they"are"
therefore"voluntary,"however"they"may"claim"necessity"as"a"ground"of"justification."For"instance"if"Z"
orders"X"to"shoot"&"kill"Y"&"threatens"to"kill"X"if"he"does"not"do"so."

Automatism(is"where"a"person"is"unable"to"subject"their"body"to"their"conscious"will."It"is"found"in"
two"forms"(1)(Sane(Automatism:(where"the"accused"is"mentally"sane"&"momentarily"becomes"
involuntary"due"to"some"external"stimuli,"goes"towards"negating"voluntariness.((2)(Insane(
Automatism:(where"the"accused"suffer"from"a"mental"pathology/illness,"this"goes"towards"negating"
capacity."

Sane(Automatism( Insane(Automatism(
Onus"remains"on"the"state"to"prove"beyond"a" Higher"burden,"the"law"assumes"that"all"people"
reasonable"doubt." are"sane,"onus"is"on"the"accused"to"negate"
capacity."
Always"nondpathological"or"temporary." Pathological"disturbance."
"

Case:"R"v"Dhlamini"1955"" " " "" " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Lack"of"voluntariness"through"somnambulism." " " " """"""""""""""""""""
Facts:"The"accused"fell"asleep"on"a"mat"in"his"room"next"to"cutlery"that"was"laying"next"to"him"from"
dinner,"he"began"to"dream"of"faces"at"his"window"that"were"coming"to"hurt"him."The"deceased"
walked"into"the"room"and"tried"to"clean"up"the"cutlery"&"was"stabbed"3"times"by"the"accused,"who"
claimed"he"acted"in"response"to"the"dream."There"was"no"evidence"to"suggest"any"bad"blood"
between"the"two"the"accused"was"therefore"acquitted." " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"Somnambulism"can"lead"to"a"lack"of"voluntariness."

Case:"R"v"Mkiza"1959" " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:"Lack"of"voluntariness"through"epileptic"fit.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Facts:(The"accused"was"cutting"meat"in"a"kitchen"&"suffered"an"epileptic"fit,"he"inflicted"serious"stab"
wounds"on"his"sister"&"she"subsequently"died."It"was"proven"on"a"balance"of"probabilities"that"the"
accused"did"in"fact"suffer"an"epileptic"fit"&"was"in"an"unconscious"state,"the"act"was"therefore"a"
reflex"and"not"voluntary,"accused"acquitted."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(An"epileptic"fit(can"lead"to"a"lack"of"voluntariness."

Antecedent(liability"(Actio&in&Libera&Causa)"is"a"term"that"states"that"if"an"accused"knew"of"their"
illness"&"acted"negligently"to"it"the"court"looks"at"it"as"if"the"cause"was"in"the"accuser’s"power."The"
test"is"if"there"was"a"time"immediately"prior"to"the"state"during"which"the"accused"was"blameworthy,"

5"
"
i.e."preceding"the"automatism"did"actus&reus&&"mens&rea&coincide."3"elements"1)(Prior"conduct"2)(
immediately"before"3)(blameworthiness/fault"(culpa/dolus).""

Case:"R"v"Victor"1942" " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:"Voluntariness"through"epileptic"fit,"using"antecedent"liability.((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(The"accused"was"charged"with"negligent"driving,"he"had"suffered"an"epileptic"fit"behind"the"
wheel"&"collided"with"a"car"&"pedestrian,"his"defence"was"that"he"was"involuntary"from"the"fit."
Evidence"before"the"court"was"that"prior"to"a"fit"there"is"a"warning"signal"&"a"reasonable"would"have"
pulled"over,"but"on"the"facts"the"court"was"not"prepared"to"say"if"the"accused"had"a"warning"signal."
The"2nd"argument"was"that"the"accused"knew"he"was"very"prone"to"epilepsy,"so"even"if"there"was"no"
warning"signal"his"conduct"was"voluntary,"accused"found"guilty." " " " """""""""""""""
Principle:"The"accused"acted"negligently"to"the"knowledge"of"his"condition"&"is"therefore"guilty."

Case:"R"v"Schoonwinkel"1953" " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Voluntariness"through"epileptic"fit,"using"antecedent"liability.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Facts:(The"accused"was"charged"with"culpable"homicide,"as"he"had"suffered"an"epileptic"fit"while"
driving"&"killed"two"people."Medical"evidence"suggested"he"had"a"rare"kind"of"epilepsy"that"had"not"
yet"fully"presented"itself;"he"had"only"experienced"two"fits"previously"the"last"of"which"was"over"a"
year"ago."Court"held"that"a"reasonable"person"would"not"have"taken"precautions"for"this"situation,"
therefore"there"is"no"blameworthiness"&"the"accused"is"acquitted." " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"The"accused"acted"like"a"reasonable"person"&"is"therefore"not"guilty."

Case:"S"v"Van"Rensburg"1987" " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Lack"of"voluntariness"through"hypoglycemia." " " " """""""""""""""""""""
Facts:"The"accused"was"charged"with"negligent"driving,"as"he"had"suffered"from"an"effect"of"
hypoglycaemia"&"collided"with"another"vehicle."He"had"seen"a"pathologist"earlier"that"day"&"blood"
samples"had"been"taken"from"him"however"the"doctor"did"not"warn"him"he"may"become"very"tired."
As"the"doctor"did"not"warn"him"it"was"found"his"conduct"was"not"voluntary"&"he"was"acquitted."
Principle:(Hypoglycaemia"can"lead"to"a"lack"of"voluntariness."

NB"the"time"of"the"automatism"must"be"established,"as"blacking"out"during"the"incident"does"not"
negate"capacity"only"if"it"is"before"the"incident."

Intoxication"is"a"socially"reprehensible"practice"of"taking"in"a"substance"knowing"of"its"effects"&"is"
viewed"with"circumspection"in"law."However"normally"it"doesn’t"matter"what"causes"the"
automatism."NB(can(negate(capacity,(voluntariness(&(intention.(The"Criminal"law"amendment"act"
has"made"relying"on"incapacity"due"to"intoxication"a"criminal"offence.""

Case:"S"v"Johnston"(Pred1981)" " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Intoxication"." " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""
Facts:(The"accused"was"arrested"for"being"drunk"in"public"&"while"in"a"jail"cell"goes"mad"and"kills"
another"old"man"in"the"cell."The"court"found"that"his"act"was"involuntary"however"they"had"to"follow"
policy"&"held"that"he"was"to"be"convicted"or"else"they"would"be"affording"more"rights"to"a"drunken"
man"than"to"a"sober"man."" " " " " " " " """"""""""""""
Principle:"The"old"court"system"focused"heavily"on"policy"&"upholding"it."

6"
"
Case:"S"v"Chretien"(Postd1981)" " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:"Intoxication." " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""
Facts:"The"accused"was"involved"in"a"fight"at"a"party,"he"decided"to"leave"the"party"got"into"his"car"&"
hit"some"people."Court"held"in"order"for"a"person"to"be"involuntary"by"means"of"alcohol"they"must"be"
“dead"drunk,”" that"is"performing"random"muscular"movements,"which"he"was"not"as"he"was"cable"
to"drive"to"an"extent."The"judgement"overruled"the"Johnston"judgement.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(An"accused"must"be"“dead"drunk”"to"use"intoxication"to"negate"voluntariness."

Sane(v(Insane(automatism(

Case:"S"v"Mahlinza"1967"" " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Lack"of"voluntariness"through"hysterical"disassociation.(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:"A"woman"had"a"6"month"old"baby"who"she"killed"&"argued"she"was"in"a"state"of"hysterical"
disassociation,"court"held"that"this"was"sane"automatism"(unconscious"involuntary"action"that"results"
from"a"manifestation"of"the"mind"caused"by"external"stimuli)."She"is"presumed"sane"unless"it"
develops"into"a"pathological"malady,"the"accused"is"not"guilty."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"Hysterical"disassociation"can"lead"to"a"lack"of"voluntariness."

Case:"S"v"Stellenmacher"1982" " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Lack"of"voluntariness"through"various"conditions." " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""
Facts:"The"accused"was"on"a"strict"diet"&"on"the"day"in"question"had"performed"strenuous"labour"&"
had"eaten"nothing."Around"3pm"he"went"to"a"local"hotel,"had"at"least"half"a"bottle"of"brandy."He"then"
gets"into"a"fight,"falls"into"automatic"state"and"shoots"&"kills"someone."Evidence"showed"that"the"
condition"was"caused"by"hypoglycaemia"and/or"epilepsy;"his"diet"may"have"caused"these"conditions."
He"courts"found"no"pathological"disorder;"there"was"simply"a"temporary"clouding"of"the"mind"(sane"
automatism)"guilty"of"culpable"homicide." " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"Someone"who"lacks"voluntariness"may"still"be"guilty"of"culpable"homicide."

Case:"S"v"Kok"2001" " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Lack"of"voluntariness"through"mental"illness." " " " """"""""""""""""""""
Facts:"The"accused"was"a"police"officer" charged"with"murder"&"attempted"murder."The"accused"
drove"to"a"Mr"Botha’s"house"&"shot"him"and"his"wife"with"a"9mm"pistol,"the"son"then"emerges"from"
the"bathtub"&"the"accused"points"a"shotgun"at"him"but"the"son"escapes"through"a"window."Medical"
evidence"shows"that"the"accused"was"suffering"from"postdtraumatic"stress"from"something"he"had"
witnessed,"his"disorder"is"characterized"by"dissociative"redenactment"of"traumatic"events."There"was"
no"bad"blood"between"the"families."The"accused"argued"sane"automatism"as"he"had"no"psychiatric"
illness,"but"the"court"held"automatism"is"a"legal"&"not"a"psychiatric"term,"S78"of"the"CPA"says"mental"
illness"doesn’t"have"to"be"psychotic."Court"held"the"condition"is"clearly"not"sane"automatism,"
accused"is"not"guilty"by"virtue"of"mental"illness." " " " " " """"""""""""""""
Principle:(Automatism"is"a"legal"&"not"a"psychiatric"term;"mental"illness"doesn’t"have"to"be"psychotic."

Proof(of(voluntariness(lies"on"the"state"to"prove"beyond"a"reasonable"doubt,"this"legal"principle"
never"shifts."An"evidentiary"burden"however"lies"on"the"accused"to"discharge"beyond"a"reasonable"
doubt"the"evidence"produced"by"the"state,"otherwise"an"accused"could"remain"quiet,"deny"the"
charges"&"wait"for"the"state"to"try"to"prove"guilt."In"this"way"voluntariness"is"assumed."

7"
"
Case:"S"v"Trickett"1973" " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(An"accuser’s"evidentiary"burden." " " " " " " """""""""""""""
Facts:("The"accused"was"involved"in"a"car"crash,"she"had"suddenly"swerved"onto"the"other"side"of"the"
road"into"another"vehicle."Defence"was"that"she"had"blacked"out"but"there"was"no"medical"evidence"
to"support"this"claim,"she"did"not"even"use"the"term"‘sane"automatism’"in"her"defence."The"court"
held"that"some"kind"of"medical"evidence"must"be"presented"in"order"to"claim"voluntariness,"even"
though"her"testimony"was"good"she"had"not"raised"a"strong"enough"defence,"there"was"no"
statement"that"she"was"suffering"from"a"sane"automatic"state,"found"guilty."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(An"accused"must"produce"evidence"if"they"raise"a"defence"of"sane"automatism."
page 94
CAUSATION) Act Consequence
In"order"to"prove"causation"it"must"be"established"that"the"accused"caused"the"unlawful"act,"we"
must"identify"&"test"the"act"(causal"chain)."Causation"is"made"up"of"two"factors,"factual"causation"&"
legal"causation."Causation"is"only"an"issue"in"consequence"crimes." chain of causation

Factual(causation((FC)"uses"the"condictio&sine&quanon"or"the"“but(for(test,”"which"asks"but"for"the"
accused"conduct"would"the"unlawful"consequence"have"ensued"when"it"did,"e.g."would"the"victim"
have"died"when"they"did,"if"no"then"the"accused"is"a"factual"cause."This"test"however"throws"the"
scope"of"liability"too"wide"&"often"there"is"more"than"one"FC."It"is"also"possible"that"nodone"is"the"FC,"
e.g."simultaneous"shooting,"in"which"case"we"ask"if"the"accused"contributed"materially"to"the"
* where conduct takes the form of a positive act , the question is asked
unlawful"consequence." * the consequence in question would not have occured at all or would not have occured
when it did
Case:"S"v"Hartman"1975"" " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:"Factual"cause"of"death." " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""
Facts:"The"accused"was"a"doctor"who"killed"his"87"year"old"father"who"was"suffering"from"incurable"
cancer,"who"was"in"any"even"near"death,"by"injection"of"a"lethal"overdose"of"anaesthetic"by"mistake"
to"help"relieve"pain."He"was"obviously"the"LC"but"was"he"a"FC?"“But"for"his"conduct"would"his"father"
have"died"when"he"did,”"no"therefore"he"was"found"guilty." " " " " """"""""""""""
Principle:""“when"he"did”"is"the"defining"factor"for"finding"an"FC.""

Legal(causation((LC)"narrows"the"FC"scope"of"liability"to"the"closest"cause"of"death."It"asks"who(the(
most(sufficient(cause(of(the(end(result(was"using"3"tests,"the"proximate"cause"test,"the"adequate"
cause"test"&"the"Nova&causa&interveniens&test"(NCI)."None"of"the"tests"are"paramount"&"all"be"used"
in"conjunction"with"each"other."

Proximate(cause(asks"who/what"in&terms&of&value&in&time"is"the"most"direct"cause"of"the"unlawful"
consequence."“Whoever"hastened"the"death"will"be"the"most"proximate"cause”"(Hartmann).""

Adequate(cause&asks"if"in&the&normal&course&of&human&experience,"does"the"conduct"of"the"accused"
end"in"the"unlawful"consequence."" (generalisation theory)

Nova%causa%interveniens%asks"if"there"is"an"intervening&event/disruption"between"the"conduct"of"the"
accused"&"the"unlawful"consequence"that"would"break"the"chain"of"causation."There"are"3"
requirements"that"an"intervening"event"must"fill"in"order"to"break"the"chain"of"causation."(1)(The"
intervening"event"must"be"an"abnormal/unusual/unexpected"one,"look"at"foresight."(2)(The"event"
must"be"independent"of"the"accused"conduct."(3)(The"event"must"be"a"FC"of"death."If"there"is"a"NCI"
found"then"the"accused"conduct"is"not"guilty"conduct."
negative test for causation
breaks chain of causation - original
8"
cause is no longer ause
"
Case:"Minister"of"Police"v"Skosana" ( (
delictual (
case ( ( ( ((((((((((((((((
Deals(with:(Applying"the"FC"&"LC"tests." " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""
Facts:"The"police"had"custody"of"the"deceased"who"was"complaining"of"stomach"cramps"&"asked"to"
be"taken"to"a"doctor,"the"police"failed"to"do"so"fast"enough"and"the"man"died"when"eventually"
reaching"a"hospital."The"court"applied"the"FC"test"first"and"found"the"officers"were"the"FC,"they"then"
applied"the"NCI"test"&"found"the"death"was"not"to"far"removed"from"the"death.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Omission"to"act"can"serve"as"conduct.""

Factors(in(assessing(NCI""

1. Subjective(foreseeUability:"as"the"event"is"an"abnormal/unusual/unexpected"one"a"
reasonable"person"must"not"be"able"to"foresee"the"unlawful"consequence"happening,"e.g."if"
A"encourages"B"to"commit"suicide"&"foresees"he"will"did"it,"the"suicide"will"not"serve"as"an"
NCI."

Case:"S"v"Grotjohn"1917"" " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Foreseedability." " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""
Facts:(The"deceased"wife"was"depressed"&"often"threatened"to"commit"suicide,"the"accused"one"day"
handed"her"a"loaded"gun"daring"her"to"do"it"&"she"subsequently"killed"herself."The"accused"can"be"
said"to"be"a"FC"as"he"contributed"materially"to"the"death,"the"accused"should"have"foreseen"that"his"
wife"may"have"committed"suicide"&"is"guilty." " " " " " """""""""""""""
Principle:(The"act"must"be"sufficiently"abnormal/unusual/unexpected"to"serve"as"an"NCI."

2. PreUexisting(conditions:"The"accused"conduct"would"lead"to"serious"injury,"medical"attention"
Text
is"given"but"the"victim"still"dies,"or"there"is"a"lack"of"proper"attention"given"by"the"victim"to"
the"condition."Seeking"medical"help"is"not"abnormal"therefore"we"must"determine"if"the"
victim"died"of"the"accused"or"his"own"conduct."

Case:"R"v"Loubser"1953" " " " " " " medical

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
intervention
Deals(with:"Personal"background"as"a"predexisting"condition." " cases" " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Facts:(The"victim"was"struck"over"the"head"with"a"stick"leaving"an"open"wound,"his"employer"
recommended"he"see"a"doctor"however"he"did"not"feel"this"was"necessary"&"did"not"do"so."He"
instead"covered"the"wound"with"a"dirty"rag,"the"wound"caught"tetanus"&"he"subsequently"died"from"
the"wound."The"court"held"that"given"the"victims"background,"a"“rural"&"primitive"person,”"it"was"not"
sufficiently"abnormal"that"he"did"not"seek"medical"advice"or"his"use"of"a"dirty"rag"to"cover"the"
wound,"further"in"the"normal"course"of"human"experience"the"wound"was"sufficiently"dangerous"to"
attract"tetanus."The"intervening"event"was"therefore"not"abnormal,"found"guilty."" """""""""""""""
Principle:(The"personal"background"of"a"victim"must"be"looked"at.""

Case:"R"v"Blaue"1975" " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Religion"as"a"predexisting"condition.((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(The"accused"stabbed"an"18"year"old"girl"which"penetrated"her"lungs"&"they"started"to"bleed"
out."She"needed"a"blood"transfusion"however"she"refused"due"to"her"religion’s"beliefs"(Jehovah’s"
Witness)."The"court"held"that"both"the"accused"&"victim’s"conduct"were"FC’s."The"court"established"
the"thin"skull"rule"or"“you"take"you"victim"as"you"find"them,”"i.e."the"particulars"of"an"individual"must"
be"taken"into"account;"this"covers"the"physical"&"mental"aspects"of"a"person."The"accused"cannot"
rely"on"a"predexisting"condition"as"it"is"not"abnormal"(no"NCI)"&"it"was"not"up"to"the"accused"to"argue"

9"
"
 that"his"victim’s"religious"belief"was"an"intervening"event,"accused"found"guilty.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Thin"Skull"rule(

Case:"S"v"Mokgethi"1990" " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Victims"conduct"as"a"NCI." " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""
Facts:(Victim"was"shot"through"the"shoulder"blades"by"the"accused"during"a"robbery"&"as"a"result"
become"a"paraplegic"reliant"on"a"wheelchair."His"condition"improved"&"he"went"back"to"work"at"the"
bank"only"to"be"readmitted"4"months"later"for"pressure"sores"&"septicaemia"for"failing"to"shift"in"his"
chair"as"directed"by"the"doctor,"&"died"2"months""later."All"3"tests"must"be"used"to"determine"if"there"
is"a"sufficiently"close"connection"when"we"test"for"causation."Generally"an"accused"conduct"will"be"to"
remote"where"(1)(failure"to"obtain"medical"treatment"is"the"immediate"cause"of"death"(against"
Loubser"&"Blaue"but"in"context"of"thin"skull"rule)."(2)(The"injury"was"not"inherently"mortal"e.g."
breaking"an"arm"(less"moral"="less"liable)."In"this"case"the"initial"fatal"wound"was"treated;"the"
immediate"cause"of"death"was"the"pressure"due"to"the"victim’s"conduct"which"was"unreasonable"as"
he"was"educated"&"informed."The"victims"conduct"is"an"NCI"&"the"cause"of"death."""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"When"we"test"for"causation"we"must"look"at"fairness,"justice"&"policy."""""
Text """"""""""""""""""""
Note:(Thin"skull"rule"need"not"apply"here"as"there"was"no"predexisting"condition."

Thin(skull(rule(includes"physical,"societal"&"beliefs."It"doesn’t"affect"fault"only"causation,"a"person"
may"not"be"negligent"&"a"person"may"not"be"guilty.""

3. Medical(Intervention:(If"X"assaults"Y"who"is"then"given"the"wrong"medical"treatment"which"
leads"to"death,"did"the"treatment"act"as"an"NCI,"it"is"not"abnormal"to"seek"medical"help"&"it"is"
page 102 not"that"unusual"that"medical"treatment"will"be"given"negligently."No"direct"authority"(no"
NCI)."
encouragement to commit suicide
Case:"R"v"Mabole"1968" " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:"Medical"attention"as"an"NCI." " " " " " " """""""""""""""""
Facts:"The"accused"stabbed"the"victim"in"the"abdomen,"the"wound"was"not"deemed"very"bad"
however"his"condition"continued"to"deteriorate."A"surgeon"proposed"exploratory"surgery"which"was"
performed"&"confirmed"no"penetrating"wounds"were"present."The"surgery"resulted"in"a"fatal"
pulmonary"embolism"(air"bubble/clot)"&"the"victim"died."The"court"held"that"provided"that"medical"
attention"is"given"with"reasonable"efficiency"&"good"will"a"patient"cannot"complain"&"it"does"not"
serve"as"an"NCI."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(If"medical"attention"is"given"with"reasonable"efficiency"&"good"will"it"is"not"an"NCI."

Case:"S"v"Williams"1986" " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Medical"attention"as"an"NCI." ( ( ( ( ( ( ((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(The"accused"shot"the"victim"through"the"neck"which"resulted"in"a"massive"amount"of"blood"
loss,"she"received"treatment"&"was"put"on"a"respirator."She"was"later"diagnosed"as"brain"dead,"her"
heart"&"lungs"were"only"functioning"via"the"respirator,"the"time"of"death"was"not"decided."The"
respirator"was"removed"&"accused"argued"that"the"removal"was"the"intervening"event."On"the"
assumption"that"a"person"is"alive"until"the"heart"stops"beating,"disconnecting"the"respirator"was"
merely"discontinuing"a"fruitless"attempt"at"keeping"the"victim"legally"alive,"no"improper"treatment"
was"given." " " " " " " " " " """""""""""""""
Principle:"If"there"is"proper"treatment"there"is"no"NCI."

10"
"
Case:"S"v"Ramosunya"2000"" " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Medical"attention"as"an"NCI.( ( ( ( ( ( ( ((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:"The"accused"stabbed"his"motherdindlaw"4"times"in"the"collarbone,"who"was"then"treated"in"
hospital"for"6"days"&"discharged."She"died"at"home"a"day"later"from"a"sepsis"of"the"lungs,"the"autopsy"
confirmed"the"sepsis"could"have"had"a"number"of"causes"&"the"accused"argued"that"the"hospital"was"
grossly"negligent"&"she"was"not"in"a"stable"condition."As"there"could"have"been"a"number"of"
reasonable"causes"for"the"sepsis"the"state"were"not"proving"beyond"a"reasonable"doubt"that"the"
accused"conduct"caused"death,"failing"better"evidence"the"accused"was"not"liable"for"murder."
Principle:(There"is"judicial"reluctance"to"rule"later"medical"treatment"will"be"construed"as"a"NCI,"if"
there"is"no"evidence"of"gross"negligence"it"will"not"be"unusual"enough."

Case:"S"v"Counter"2003" " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Medical"attention"as"an"NCI." " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Facts:(The"accused"was"31"&"estranged"from"his"wife,"one"evening"his"fired"a"shot"at"her"which"
struck"her"buttocks"&"penetrated"her"anal"canal."Doctor"of"original"examination"found"a"2cm"
entrance"wound"but"no"exit"wound"&"was"aware"that"the"canal"may"be"internally"injured"&"
conducted"an"examination"per"rectum"with"his"fingers"but"found"no"damage."The"patient"was"
treated"&"had"xdrays"taken"which"showed"no"problem,"her"condition"however"deteriorated"as"
necrosis"had"started"in"the"body"&"she"was"given"antibiotics"too"late,"the"victim"died"of"multiple"
organ"failure."The"was"no"evidence"that"other"medical"expertise"would"have"found"the"injury"or"that"
any"other"procedure"would"have"worked,"the"doctor"therefore"did"not"act"negligently"as"there"was"
no"compelling"reason"to"take"further"precautions."Held"the"sequence"of"events""from"her"admission"
until"death"were"the"natural"order"of"events,"the"wound"had"obviously"allowed"germs"to"spread"&"it"
was"inconceivable"that"the"accused"should"not"be"held"accountable."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"If"there"is"proper"treatment"there"is"no"NCI."

Case:"S"v"Tembani"2007"" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Medical"attention"as"an"NCI." " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Facts:"The"accused"had"shot"his"girlfriend"after"an"argument,"one"bullet"had"pierced"the"bowels"
which"lead"to"bile"&"bowel"matter"to"spill"into"her"abdominal"cavity."The"evidence"was"such"that"if"
left"unattended"this"would"be"fatal,"&"further"showed"that"with"adequate"&"timious"treatment"it"
could"be"nondfatal."The"deceased"was"however"left"in"a"normal"waiting"room"for"6"days"&"died"as"the"
hospital"was"understaffed,"&"it"was"common"cause"that"the"treatment"was"subdstandard"&"
negligent."The"court"held"the"gunshot"was"still"the"substantial"cause"of"death"&"only"if"the"medical"
negligence"was"so"overwhelming"as"to"make"the"original"wound"merely"a"history"in"the"chain"of"
causation"will"the"medical"intervention"be"sufficiently"removed"from"the"accused"conduct."Therefore"
no"NCI"existed." " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"Even"if"there"is"a"small"amount"of"negligence"it"is"not"sufficiently"abnormal"to"make"it"
independent"of"the"accused"conduct."You"must"apply"a"flexible"yardstick"of"policy"considerations."

4. Successive(assaults:(Where"one"accused"will"perform"an"act"making"a"victim"an"easy"target"
&"another"accused"will"perform"a"subsequent"fatal"act."Hunt’s&Principle:&if"the"original"injury"
is"(1)"a"mortal"one"&"(2)"combines"physiologically"with"the"latter"injury,"the"latter"injury"does"
not"serve"as"an"NCI.(

11"
"
Case:"S"v"Burger"1975" " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Appling"Hunt’s"principle."" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""
Facts:(The"accused"assaulted"X"by"administering"a"few"hard"kicks"to"his"stomach,"which"caused"a"
perforation"on"the"small"intestine."Two"days"later"X"was"assaulted"by"two"other"men."Medical"
evidence"showed"that"the"original"accused"conduct"caused"death"&"subsequent"conduct"hastened"it,"
the"accused"was"guilty"of"culpable"homicide." " " " " " """""""""""""
Principle:(Application"of"the"two"rules"of"Hunt’s"principle."

Case:"S"v"Mbambo"1965"" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Appling"Hunt’s"principle."" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""
Facts:(The"first"accused"threw"stones"at"X"which"hit"on"the"head"causing"him"to"fall"to"the"ground,"
the"second"accused"then"stabbed"him"in"the"chest,"killing"him."Court"held"that"although"the"first"
accused"was"a"FC"his"conduct"was"not"fatal"&"did"not"combine"physiologically"with"the"stabbing,"he"is"
therefore"only"liable"for"assault"with"the"intention"to"do"grievous"harm." " " """"""""""""""""""
Principle:(The"NCI"must"comply"with"the"two"requirements"of"the"Hunt"principle."

Case:"S"v"Daniels"1983" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Appling"Hunt’s"principle."" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""
Facts:(The"two"accused"did"not"know"each"other,"they"had"both"been"driven"in"the"X’s"taxi,"a"fight"
broke"out"and"the"first"accused"pulled"out"a"gun,"X"ran"away"and"is"chased"by"both"of"the"accused."
The"first"accused"fired"three"shots"&"X"fell"to"the"floor,"the"second"accused"then"comes"&"fires"a"
single"shot"into"the"body."Three"bullet"wounds"were"found"in"the"body,"two"in"the"back"&"one"in"the"
head,"the"first"accused"was"presumed"to"have"fired"the"two"back"shots,"&"the"second"the"headshot"
(proximate"clause)."Evidence"was"that"the"back"shots"would"have"inevitably"caused"death."""""""""""""""""
AJ(Van(Winsen:(had"difficulty"in"aligning"himself"with"the"idea"that"a"person"who"inflicts"a"mortal"
wound"can"be"acquitted"because"he"is"not"the"most"proximate"clause."It"may"serve"as"an"NCI"in"the"
situation"where"the"initial"wound"was"not"a"mortal"one."The"first"accused"fired"two"shots"into"X’s"
back,"it"cannot"be"assumed"that"if"the"chain"of"causation"stopped"there"that"a"car"would"not"have"
come"passed"&"saved"the"man"(adequate"clause)."Finds"the"first"accused"guilty"i.e."no"NCI.""""""""""""""""""""""
AJ(Botha:(Looks"at"common"purpose"&"finds"the"accused"guilty."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
AJ(Trengove:(It"wasn’t"certain"from"the"evidence"who"fired"the"headshot,"the"best"assumption"of"the"
first"accused"is"that"he"caused"the"shots"to"the"back."He"therefore"had"an"intention"to"kill"X"&"fatally"
wounded"him,"however"this"was"not"the"real"cause"of"death,"the"first"accused"is"guilty"of"attempted"
murder"(favours"liberty"&"relies"on"the"proximate"clause)." " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""
AJ(Jansen:(From"medical"evidence"it"appears"the"immediate"cause"of"death"was"the"headshot"
(proximate)"not"the"shots"to"the"back."This"however"does"not"absolve"the"first"accused"liability,"he"
was"a"FC"&"had"intention,"fault,"&"was"voluntary,"in"the"normal"course"of"human"experience"death"
would"have"resulted."An"error"he"had"to"stop"the"causal"chain"cannot"benefit"the"first"accused,"so"
using"hunts"principle""the"wounds"would"combine"physiologically"with"the"second"accused"conduct"
and"is"therefore"guilty."" " " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""
Principle:(The"first"accused"was"found"guilty"by"the"majority.""

FAULT)
Falls"under"Mens"Rea"&"can"be"present"in"the"form"of"either"intention"(Dolus)"or"negligence"(Culpa),"
the"kind"of"fault"is"normally"defined"by"the"crime,"e.g."murder"="Dolus;"culpable"homicide"="Culpa."All"
common"law"crimes"require"dolus"for"conviction,"except"CH,"statutory"crimes"will"indicate"what"

12"
"
mens&rea"is"needed,"otherwise"it"will"be"determined."Strict"liability"crimes"do"not"need"fault"for"an"
accused"to"be"guilty,"i.e."speeding"in"a"car.""

mens%rea%must(extend(to(every(element"of"a"crime,"e.g."Murder"is"the"(1)"unlawful"(2)"intentional"(3)"
killing"of"another"(4)"human"being.""A"person"must"foresee"and"act"recklessly"to"all"of"these"elements"
in"order"to"be"guilty.""

Case:"S"v"Churchill"1959"" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(mens&rea&of&a&crime.&( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:"The"accused"was"charged"with"the"common"law"crime"of"abduction"for"taking"a"minor"girl"out"
of"her"parents’"custody"for"the"purpose"of"having"intercourse,"the"accused"argued"that"he"did"not"
know"she"was"underage."In"order"for"there"to"be"a"crime"there"must"be"(1)"lack"of"guardians"consent,"
(2)"removal"from"the"guardian,"(3)"an"underage"minor."Court"held"that"it"was"reasonably"possible"
that"he"did"not"know"the"girl"was"a"minor"&"if"he"did"not"know"this"he"could"not"reasonably"foresee"
the"crime."The"mens&rea&does"not"extend"to"every"element"of"the"crime,"he"is"therefore"acquitted.""
Principle:(mens&rea&must"extend"to"every"element"of"a"crime."

The(mens%rea%must(be(contemporaneous"(at"the"same"time)"with"the"actus&rea."E.g."say"‘A’"fails"
criminal"law"&"plots"to"kill"his"lecturer,"buys"a"gun,"and"generally"gets"prepared"to"do"the"act."
However"while"his"is"driving"he"is"involved"in"an"accident"&"kills"his"lecturer,"his"intention"does"not"
exist"at"the"time"of"the"accident"and"so"he"is"only"guilty"of"culpable"homicide."

o INTENTION"(DOLUS)(

This"is"the"legal,"not"societal,"form"of"intention,"it"is"therefore"possible"to"legally"intend"to"kill"
without"actually"wanting"to"kill"someone."There"are"3"forms"of"intention"

1) Dolus&directus:"where"one"intends"a"certain"outcome/aim"&"meets"that"outcome/aim."
2) Dolus&indirectus:"where"one"has"a"certain"outcome/aim"but"they"know"in"order"to"achieve"it"
that"another"unlawful"consequence"will"ensue.""
3) Dolus&eventualis:"is"sufficient"for"a"conviction"(De"Bruyn)"&"must"show"that"the"accused"(1)"
foresaw"a"(2)"real"possibility"of"the"unlawful"consequence"&"(3)"acted"recklessly"to"that"
foresight."

Doctrine(of(‘Vesari’(holds"that"if"an"accused"embarks"on"an"unlawful"act"with"intention,"then"every"
single"unlawful"deed"that"stems"from"that"initial"wrongddoing"will"be"imputed"to"him."This"goes"
against"the"contemporaneous"principle"&"is"not"longer"valid"in"our"law."E.g."a"man"who"is"illegally"
hunting"shoots"a"man"which"he"thought"was"a"buck,"he"is"liable"for"murder."

Case:"R"v"Wallendorf"1920" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Use"of"the"Vesari"principle.( ( ( ( ( ( ( ((((((((((((((((
rd
Facts:(The"accused"assaulted"a"police"officer"who"was"trying"to"arrest"a"3 "party,"the"officer"was"not"
in"uniform,"the"accused"was"trying"to"help"his"friend"&"did"not"believe"he"was"a"police"officer."The"
court"held"the"accused"liable"for"obstructing"the"ends"of"justice,"mens&rea&was"simply"imputed"via"his"
intention"to"assault"via"the"Vesari"principle." " " " " " """"""""""""""
Principle:(The"accused"conduct"is"imputed"due"to"the"fact"that"his"initial"conduct"was"illegal."

13"
"
Case:"R"v"Matsepe"1931"" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Use"of"the"Vesari"principle.( ( ( ( ( ( ( ((((((((((((((((
Facts:(The"accused"was"a"driver"of"a"truck"&"without"his"knowledge"a"child"climbed"onto"the"back"
while"he"was"driving,"he"negligently"crashes"into"a"tree"&"the"child"dies."The"accused"was"performing"
an"unlawful"negligent"act"so"the"mens&rea&is"imputed"onto"the"consequence,"the"accused"is"guilty"of"
culpable"homicide." " " " " " " " " """""""""""""
Principle:(The"accused"conduct"is"imputed"due"to"the"fact"that"his"initial"conduct"was"illegal."

Case:"S"v"Van"der"Mascht"1962" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(First"signs"of"rejecting"the"Vesari"principle.( ( ( ( ( ( ((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"&"G"had"melted"down"some"gold"amalgam"on"a"stove"to"extract"the"gold,"the"heated"
amalgam"gave"off"a"poisonous"gas"resulting"in"the"death"of"G"&"his"4"children."Court"a"quo"held"A"
guilty"of"culpable"homicide"using"the"Vesari"doctrine,"the"deaths"were"imputed"from"illegally"heating"
gold"without"a"permit,"&"that"a"reasonable"person"would"have"foreseen"the"production"of"poison"
gas."The"appeal"court"(SCA)"set"this"aside"for"both"reasons,"there"was"no"evidence"to"suggest"a"
poison"gas"would"be"produced.""" " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(The"Vesari"principle’s"validity,"although"rejected"in"this"case,"was"left"open"for"question."

Case:"S"v"Bernardus"1965" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Rejection"the"Vesari"principle.( ( ( ( ( ( ((((((((((((((((
Facts:(The"accused"killed"X"by"throwing"a"‘kiri’"at"him"which"penetrated"X’s"skull."Court"a"quo"applied"
the"Vesari"doctrine"but"left"a"question"of"law"for"a"higher"court"of"“is"the"person"guilty"of"Murder"or"
Culpable"Homicide"when"he"assaults"another"&"causes"death"but"where"the"death"could"not"have"
been"foreseen.”"The"court"held"that"dolus&eventualis&must"be"proven,"in"this"case"it"could"not"be"said"
that"the"accused"acted"negligently,"nor"can"it"be"said"that"a"person"who"assaults"always"intends"to"
cause"death."A"reasonable"person"could"foresee"that"a"‘kiri’"could"impale"their"victim,"the"accused"is"
guilty"of"culpable"homicide"(against"the"Vesari"doctrine)."" " " " " """""""""""""""""
Principle:&The"Vesari"doctrine"is"rejected"completely,"either"there"is"intention"or"not,"we"must"test"
fault"according"to"the"conduct"that"actually"occurred."

dolus%(directus%&(dolus%(indirectus(are"intention"proper"i.e."the"accused"intended"the"result."

Case:"R"v"Kewelrom"1922" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Differentiating"between"dolus&"directus&&"dolus&"indirectus." " " """"""""""""""""""""""
Facts:(The"accused"was"a"businessman"that"set"fire"to"his"stock"in"order"to"claim"insurance,"after"
starting"the"fire"he"realised"it"would"spread"to"his"factory,"and"both"were"burnt"down."He"was"
charged"with"arson"of"the"building"but"which"form"of"dolus"was"this." " " " """"""""""""""""
Principle:(The"act"was"dolus&indirectus.""

Case:"S"v"Hartman"1975"" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Differentiating"between"dolus&"directus&&"dolus&"indirectus." " " """"""""""""""""""""""
Facts:(The"accused,"a"doctor,"killed"his"father"by"giving"him"an"overdose"of"medication"by"mistake"to"
stop"him"from"suffering,"he"did"not"intend"to"kill"his"father."It"couldn’t"be"proven"beyond"a"
reasonable"doubt"that"he"intended"to"kill,"however"he"should"have"known"the"overdose"would"kill."
Principle:(Court"held"this"was"dolus&indirectus"however"it"should"have"been"dolus&eventualis."

14"
"
Case:"R"v"Jolly"1923" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Differentiating"between"dolus&"directus&&"dolus&"indirectus." ( ( (((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(Accused"were"strikers"who"derailed"a"train"with"the"intent"to"disrupt"raildtraffic,"they"did"not"
intend"to"kill/harm"anyone"&"in"reality"nodone"was"seriously"injured."The"accused"were"charged"with"
assault"with"intent"to"murder,"there"could"not"be"dolus&"directus&or"dolus&"indirectus,"as"they"could"
not"foresee"a"person"dying." " " " " " " " " """""""""""
Principle:(Court"held"dolus&eventualis&existed.""

dolus%eventualis%is"a"legal"intention"with"a"legal"test."As"such"the"parties’"actual"intention"is"
irrelevant"as"the"state"is"trying"to"prevent"crime."This"test"is"most"often"used"as"it"is"seldom"possible"
to"find"the"accused"actual"intention."Is"sufficient"for"intention"(De"Bruyn)."

1) Foresight:"(
• Negligence"is"an"objective"test"traditionally"as"it"is"not"specific"to"anyone,"subjective"tests"are"
ones"that"are"related"to"the"particular"accused.(
• Fault"was"originally"a"purely"objective"test,"looking"at"the"accused"intention,"a"reasonable"person"
would"have"foreseen"&"the"accused"is"a"reasonable"person"he"must"have"foreseen"(confusing).(
• Fault"is"now"a"subjective"test,"i.e."the"mind"of"the"accused.(
• There"is"still"some"utility"in"looking"at"objective"factors,"as"the"intention"of"the"accused"cannot"
always"be"found."Objective"factors"are"used"to"determine"an"accused"subjective"intention"BUT"
objective"factors"will"only"reveal"an"accused"subjective"intention"if"the"inferences"drawn"from"
the"objective"factors"is"the"only"inference"that"can"be"drawn.(
• The"inferences"will"depend"on"the"facts"of"the"case"&"evidence,"e.g."the"type"of"weapon"used;"
seriousness"of"the"injury;"body"part"injured"are"factors"to"consider"for"foresight.(
• It"is"ok"to"used"objective"factors"to"prove"foresight"as"the"more"objectively"probable"the"death"
the"more"subjectively"probable"the"accused"foresaw"the"death.(

Case:"S"v"Sigwala"1967" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Objective"factors"to"make"subjective"inferences." ( (( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:"A"was"armed"with"a"long"knife"in"his"hand,"the"deceased"was"walking"towards"A,"A"lunged"
forward"grazing"his"arm"with"the"knife"&"then"stabbing"the"decreased"in"the"chest"causing"a"wound"
about"4"inches"deep."Court"held"that"it"wouldn’t"draw"inference"to"kill"unless"it"was"the"only"
inference"that"could"be"drawn"from"the"facts."Objective"factors"such"as"the"long"knife,"A"lunging"
forward"ect,"meant"that"A"subjectively"appreciated"that"the"wound"would"be"fatal,"there"was"no"
possibility"that"the"wound"would"not"be."" " " " " " """"""""""""""
Principle:(It"is"sufficient"that"that"A"subjectively"foresaw"the"possibility"of"causing"death"&"acted"
recklessly"to"this"result."

Case:"S"v"Mini"1963" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Objective"factors"to"make"subjective"inferences." ( (( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"stabbed"the"deceased"in"the"back"in"the"chest"area"with"a"long"sharp"pointed"knife,"the"
wound"was"about"¾"of"an"inch"deep"however"further"facts"are"that"the"deceased"was"a"slightly"built"
man."When"A"was"seen"leaving"the"scene"he"was"heard"to"be"saying"“I"told"you"I’d"stab"you.”"Can"A"
be"liable"for"murder?"Minority"held"that"A"must"have"foreseen"the"possibility"of"death"from"stabbing"
a"built"man,"majority"was"not"convinced"an"ignorant"man"would"have"foreseen"death"as"the"wound"
was"not"deep,"the"wording"used"does"not"fit"(he"did"not"say"‘kill’"only"‘stab’)."A"normal"person"with"

15"
"
no"medical"knowledge"would"not"know"the"difference"between"stabbing"a"big"or"small"man."
Principle:(in"law"a"person"intends"to"kill"if"he"deliberately"commits"an"act"which"he"appreciates"might"
result"in"death"&"acts"recklessly"as"to"if"the"death"will"result."

• NB:"thin"skull"rule"does"not"assist"in"proving"fault,"consequence"being"that"anytime"a"victim"with"
a"predcondition/susceptibility"that"could"not"have"been"foreseen"there"is"no"dolus&or"negligence."
(
2) Real(Possibility""
• Dolus&eventualis&is"already"an"extension"of"intention"as"we"understand"it"in"the"ordinary"sense"&"
that"justifies"foresight"of"a"real"possibility,"it"is"taking"intention"further"away"from"what"we"
understand"intention"in"the"ordinary"sense"to"be.""
• Real"as"opposed"to"remote"possibility"is"required,"remote"possibility"seems"to"evidence"
negligence."The"accused"must"foresee"death"as"something"that"is"more"likely"to"happen"than"not"
(R"v"Horn)."Rationale:"DE"is"already"a"‘legal’"form"of"intention"detracting"from"intent"in"the"
ordinary"sense."

Case:"S"v"Shaik"1983" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(There"must"be"a"real,"not"remote,"possibility." ( (( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(Not"important." " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""
Principle:(Court"held"that"when"an"accused"foresees,"he"has"to"foresee"a"real"rather"than"a"remote"
possibility.""

Case:"S"v"Horn"1958" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(There"must"be"a"real,"not"remote,"possibility." ( (( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"found"2"women"stealing"melons"from"his"farm,"when"he"confronted"them"they"started"to"
run"away,"one"however"stopped"&"came"back,"the"other"kept"running"despite"A’s"3"calls"&"A"fires"a"
shot"from"his"pistol"to"scare"her."He"was"about"36"paces"away"when"he"shot"&"witnesses"confirmed"
he"had"pointed"the"gun"far"to"the"right"of"woman."Court"a"quo"held"him"liable"for"murder,"the"appeal"
held"that"killing"her"was"not"the"only"inference"that"could"be"made,"as"he"was"trying"to"shoot"to"the"
side"of"her,"the"court"however"tuned"on"a"real"possibility."The"held"that"A"fired"from"a"great"distance"
without"pointing"at"the"deceased,"his"intention"to"kill"could"not"be"inferred"simply"from"the"lethal"
weapon."Secondly"held"that"according"to"law"at"the"time"a"citizen"was"entitled"to"arrest"a"thief"&"
take"necessary"steps"to"prevent"them"from"escaping."If"this"was"A’s"intention"it"points"to"the"fact"
that"A"could"not"foresee"death"as"a"real"possibility,"merely"injury,"which"even"then"was"remote"due"
to"the"distance"&"nondaiming."Held"liable"for"culpable"homicide.""" " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"The"accused"must"foresee"a"real"rather"than"a"remote"possibility."

3) Recklessness(
• A"person"must"act"reckless"to"the"foresight"of"a"real"possibility"of"death"e.g."A"owns"a"mine"&"he"
foresees"danger"to"his"employees"as"the"left"shaft"is"faulty,"he"get"it"repaired"but"the"next"day"a"
cable"snaps"&"some"minors"die."He"foresaw"a"real"possibility"but"did"not"act"recklessly"to"this,"he"
is"therefore"not"criminally"liable"&"there"is"no"mens&rea.""
• Other"ways"of"explaining"it"are:"“taking"the"possibility"into"the"bargain”"or"“conceding"yourself"to"
the"materialization"of"the"possibility”"or"“consciously"accepting"the"risk”"or"“don’t"allow"yourself"
to"be"deterred"by"your"foresight.”"

16"
"
• It"ties"in"with"the"requirement"of"a"real"possibility,"if"the"accused"can"only"slightly"foresee"the"
possibility"the"less"chance"you"will"act"recklessly"to"it."The"more"foreseeable"the"more"reckless"
you"will"have"to"be."

General(intention((dolus&inderterminatus)"

• Is"where"intention"is"not"necessary"in"relation"to"a"particular"person,"it"may"be"
general/indeterminate"e.g."throwing"a"bomb"into"a"crowd."The"accused"will"have"dolus&
eventualis&that"is"general"in"nature,"a"desired"goal"is"not"needed,"backdrop"of"the"other"3"tests."

Intention(v(Motive(

• Motive"(reason"for"committing"a"crime)"is"not"an"element"of"a"crime,"intention"is,"however"both"
relate"to"the"accused"state"of"mind."(
• Motive"can"evidence"the"existence"of"a"ground"of"justification."It"can"be"useful"in"sentencing"e.g."
Hartman."It"is"also"important"for"evidentiary"purposes"&"can"sometimes"lead"to"the"identity"of"
the"perpetrator."Some"motives"carry"a"higher"degree"of"blameworthiness"which"assists"in"
sentencing.(
• Motive"will"never"help"prove"criminal"liability.(
(
o NEGLIGENCE"(CULPA)(
• Is"an"objective"standard."It"is"wrongful"because"the"law"requires"a"certain"standard"of"care"&"the"
accused"is"falling"short"of"this"standard"that"is"punishable."It"is"not"inadvertence"but"rather"the"
fact"that"another"person"would"have"averted.""
• It"is"sufficient"to"prove"culpa&for"culpable"homicide,"some"instances"of"contempt"of"court,"and"
some"instances"of"statutory"crimes."
• Culpable"homicide"is"a"lesser"form"of"a"crime"than"murder;"it"is"a"competent"verdict"of"murder."If"
intention"cannot"be"proven"but"negligence"can"the"lower"sentence"can"be"held."During"
sentencing"you"have"mitigating"&"aggravating"circumstances;"it"is"therefore"possible"for"culpable"
homicide"to"serve"a"higher"sentence"than"even"murder.""
• Test(for(negligence((Kruger"v"Coetzee):"
1. Would"a"reasonable"person"in"the"circumstances"have"foreseen?"
2. Would"a"reasonable"person"in"the"circumstances"have"taken"steps"to"guard"against"the"
unlawful"event?"
3. Did"the"accused"take"these"steps?"
• Who"is"the"reasonable"man?"

Case:"S"v"Burger"1978" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Who"is"the"reasonable"man."( (( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"young"strong"man"wearing"heavy"shoes"kicked"a"slender"young"man"in"the"stomach&"he"
died,"the"court"held"a"responsible"man"would"have"foreseen"death"from"the"kicks."Court"held"the"
reasonable"man"is"the"dillgens&paterfamilias&(diligent"household"head)"or"the"national"meaning"of"
prudence."It"is"not"someone"who"has"Solomonic"wisdom,"prophetic"foresight"or"chameleonic"caution"
however"he"is"also"not"overdnervous"or"timid."In"short"he"is"a"man"who"treads"life"pathways"with"
moderate"&"prudent"common"sense." " " " " " " """""""""""""""

17"
"
Principle:(The"reasonable"man"is"a"man"who"treads"life"pathways"with"moderate"&"prudent"common"
sense."

Case:"S"v"Mbombela"1933" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Who"is"the"reasonable"man."( (( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:"A"was"a"young"tribal"boy"of"18,"on"the"day"in"question"some"children"ran"up"to"him"&"told"him"
they"had"seen"an"evil"spirit"(tokolosh)"whose"gaze"can"kill."A"grabbed"an"axe"&"ran"into"the"hut"&"kills"
the"figure,"it"was"however"a"toddler"wrapped"in"a"blanket.""The"issue"was"negligence"&"further"if"it"
was"right"to"subjectivise"the"test"for"negligence,"i.e."can"we"change"who"the"reasonable"man"is."Court"
held"that"a"reasonable"person"in"that"community"would"have"taken"other"steps"&"there"was"
therefore"no"need"to"subjectivise"the"test."Further"held"1)the"reasonable"man"is"a"white"city"man"not"
a"rural"black"(Apartheid),"today"it"would"be"an"average"citizen"who"abides"by"the"constitution/law."2)"
the"reasonable"man"does"not"believe"in"spirits,"today"a"person"may"believe"in"whatever"they"want"
provided"it"doesn’t"infringe"on"others"rights."When"applying"the"reasonable"man"test"we"disregard"
culture,"intelligence,"ignorance,"superstition,"personal"identity"ect." " " """""""""""""""
Principle:"There"is"only"1"reasonable"man"standard,"applied"objectively." " " """"""""
Criticism:(Can"you"deter"someone"by"punishing"them"for"not"reaching"a"standard"they"cannot"reach?"

• There"are"certain"exceptions"to"the"rule"made"in"Mbombela"
1. If"a"person"professes"to"have"expert"knowledge,"a"higher"standard"is"required."NOTE:"a"
reasonable"person"does"not"profess"to"have"a"skill"that"they"do"not"have,"the"test"is"
therefore"still"objective.""
2. People"who"actually"have"specialized"skills/expert"knowledge"have"a"higher"standard"e.g."a"
doctor."
3. Look"at"the"actual"physical"position"of"the"accused."NOTE:"this"is"still"objective."
• The(interplay(between(dolus%&(culpa."Dolus:"the"accused"has"to"foresee"a"real"possibility"&"act"
recklessly,"when"only"a"slight"possibility"is"foreseen"it"amounts"to"negligence."Dolus&therefore"
doesn’t"exclude"the"existence"of"culpa,"just"because"A"has"dolus&doesn’t"mean"a"reasonable"man"
wouldn’t"have"foreseen"&"been"negligent.""
• Can"you"use"the"existence"of"dolus&to"argue"you"were"not"negligent?"E.g."X"is"charged"with"
murder"but"the"state"cannot"prove"intention,"only"negligence."Can"X"say"even"if"I"should"have"
foreseen"the"possibility"it"is"reasonably"possible"I"did,"thus"I"have"dolus&eventualis&not"culpa."

Case:"S"v"Ngubane"1985"" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Interplay"between"dolus&&"culpa." ( (( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"is"charged"with"murder"&"pleads"guilty"to"culpable"homicide"which"the"state"accepts"&"tries"
to"prove."The"state"then"finds"dolus&eventualus&&"convicts"him"of"murder,"A"appeals"saying"murder"
cannot"be"found"after"the"state"has"accepted"the"charge"of"culpable"homicide."Held"that"the"trail"
court"acted"irregularly"by"adjudicating"a"charge"of"murder"when"looking"for"culpable"homicide."
Murder"&"culpable"homicide"are"competent"charges"so"if"dolus"cannot"be"found"but"culpa"is"then"
culpable"homicide"will"be"held"not"murder."However"if"charged"with"culpa&&"dolus"is"found,"the"
charge"cannot"be"converted"into"murder." " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Cuplable"homicide"is"a"competent"of"murder"but"not"vice"versa."

18"
"
• If"culpa&&"dolus&were"mutually"exclusive,"the"accused"could"raise"a"defence"that"he"intended"to"
kill"as"a"defence"against"negligence."Dolus&therefore"does"not"exclude"culpa,"both"can"exist"but"
the"higher"will"attract"liability."

Case:"S"v"Hedley"1958" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Foresight"of"a"reasonable"man."(( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"was"hunting"a"bird"which"was"emerging"from"a"surface"of"water,"he"shot"&"missed"the"bird"
the"bullet"however"ricocheted"off"the"water"&"hit"a"small"girl"a"considerable"distance"away"in"a"hut"
on"the"other"side.""A"contested"he"had"seen"the"huts"but"never"people"near"them."Could"he"be"said"
to"be"negligent?"A"was"charged"with"culpable"homicide,"A"argued"he"did"not"foresee"the"death"&"
further"it"was"a"remote"not"a"real"possibility"(murder)."Cases"where"there"is"foresight"of"a"remote"
possibility"are"not"concerned"with"dolus"but"conscious"negligence."On"the"facts"A"was"found"to"be"
negligent"&"should"have"taken"steps"to"guard"against"the"unlawful"consequence."" " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(When"culpa&is"an"issue,"even"a"remote"possibility"is"sufficient,"this"makes"sense"as"we"are"
comparing"to"a"reasonable"man."

• The"exceptions:"

Case:"S"v"Mahlahela"1966" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"People"professing"to"have"special"skills."(( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:"A"witchdoctor"gave"a"girl"a"herbal"potion"to"drink"which"was"poisonous"&"killed"her."A"was"
charged"with"culpable"homicide,"the"court"held"even"though"he"didn’t"realise"the"potion"was"
poisonous"(dolus)"he"should"have"reasonably"realised"(culpa)"because"this"was"in"his"sphere"of"
knowledge." " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Even"if"the"accused"is"no"expert"he"will"still"be"judged"higher"because"he"professed"it,"
reasonable"people"don’t"do"this."

Case:"S"v"Southern"1965"" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"People"professing"to"have"special"skills."(( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"bus"driver"charged"with"culpable"homicide"after"an"accident"&"passengers"died."The"court"
held"that"the"reasonable"man"had"to"be"put"into"the"position"of"the"accused,"what"would"he"have"
done"in"those"circumstances." " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"The"courts"are"willing"to"look"at"the"position"of"A"if"there"are"external"physical"factors"e.g."
weather","that"road,"that"day,"that"time"ect."

• What"must"be"foreseen"by"A"in"order"to"be"liable"for"CH?"Usually"people"cause"culpable"
homicide"through"assault,"there"is"therefore"intention."3"different"judges"with"different"views:"

Case:"S"v"Bernardus"1965" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Foreseen"consequences"for"culpable"homicide."(( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(“a"person"is"guilty"of"culpable"homicide"if"he"assaults"another"&"in"doing"so"causes"death,"but"
in"circumstances"where"it"couldn’t"reasonably"foresee"death.”"" " " " " """""""""""
AJ(Stein:(for"culpable"homicide"the"state"must"prove"the"reasonable"man"would"have"foreseen"death"
as"a"possible"result,"if"he"would"have"only"foreseen"bodily"injury,"even"if"serious,"he"hasn’t"fallen"
short"of"this." " " " " " " " " " " """""""""""""
AJ(Holmes:(where"the"possibility"of"serious"injury"is"foreseeable,"then"death"must"be"reasonably"
foreseeable,"and"will"be"guilty,"takes"the"view"that"serious"injury"is"foreseeing"death.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

19"
"
AJ(Rump:(as"long"as"there"is"some"bodily"injury"that"is"foreseeable"then"death"is"always"foreseeable,"
a"normal"person"should"foresee"a"minor"assault"could"have"extraordinary"consequences.""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Foresight"is"difficult"to"determine."

Case:"S"v"Van"As"1976" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Foreseen"consequences"for"culpable"homicide."(( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(Altercation"between"X"&"Y,"X"gave"Y"a"hard"slap"on"his"cheek"&"as"a"result"Y,"who"was"a"very"
fat"man,"lost"his"footing"falling"backwards"&"hit"his"head"on"the"concrete"floor"which"killed"him."The"
trail"court"held"X"liable"for"culpable"homicide,"X"appealed."Using"Steins"test"a"reasonable"man"would"
not"have"foreseen"&"X"would"not"be"guilty."Using"Holmes"test"a"reasonable"man"would"not"have"
foreseen"&"X"would"not"be"guilty."Using"Rumps"test"there"was"injury"so"X"is"liable."Held"that"it"
couldn’t"be"proven"beyond"a"reasonable"doubt"that"X"would"have"foreseen"Y"falling"backwards"&"
dying,"X"is"not"guilty." " " " " " " " " """""""""""""""
Principle:(Look"at"what"the"reasonable"man"would"have"foreseen."

• Homes’s"statement"would"not"always"hold"true,"e.g."a"broken"leg"is"a"serious"injury"but"not"
necessarily"life"threatening."

Case:"Balkwell"v"S"2007" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Foreseen"consequences"for"culpable"homicide."(( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(M"disappeared"on"the"day"in"question,"he"worked"for"B"(accused)"in"his"photo"lab."Common"
clause"that"M"had"a"drug"problem,"he"stole"R70"000"from"work"before"disappearing."B"&"a"friend,"
who"was"a"bouncer,"search"for"M"&"get"a"tip"off"he"is"staying"at"A’s"flat."B,"his"friend"&"his"wife"go"to"
the"residence"&"assault"M"demanding"the"money."M"was"punched"several"times"by"the"friend"&"
kicked"in"the"stomach"by"him"&"B"on"his"back"&"front."M"was"dragged"into"a"parking"lot"&"a"security"
guard"was"asked"to"bring"water"to"clean"his"face,"while"he"was"getting"water"the"assault"continued."
M"was"eventually"put"into"the"wife’s"car"&"they"drive"away,"on"the"way"M"defecates"&"dies,"B"&"his"
friend"throw"the"body"into"a"trench."The"accused"alleged"that"they"never"intended"to"kill"&"couldn’t"
have"foreseen"he"would"have"died,"evidence"showed"the"beating"was"relatively"minor."Court"held"
that"a"number"of"factors"must"be"looked"at"to"see"if"the"appellants"foresaw"death,"these"
overwhelming"showed"that"it"was"not"a"minor"assault,"there"were"witnesses"saying"they"heard"the"
men"saying"they"would"‘fuck"him"up,’"there"were"testimonies"of"cries"of"pain,"as"well"as"the"
numinous"punches"&"kicks"given."In"light"of"this"a"reasonable"person"ought"to"have"foreseen"death."
Principle:(Case"implies"that"serious"bodily"injury"in"addition"to"surrounding"circumstances"will"
indicate"if"a"reasonable"person"would"have"foreseen."

CULPA( DOLUS(EVENTUALIS(
1)Would"a"reasonable"man"have"foreseen?" 1)Foresight"is"the"only"inference."
2)Would"a"reasonable"man"have"taken"steps"to" 2)Real"possibility"of"death."
guard"against?"
3)Did"the"accused"take"steps?" 3)Act"reckless"to"this"knowledge."
"

MISTAKE)
• Fault"is"either"douls/culpa&but"it"can"be"negated/excluded"through"2"principles."
1) Mens&rea&must"extend"to"every"element"of"a"crime,"if"it"doesn’t"="no"crime."Actus&rues&&"
mens&rea&must"coincide"(contemporaneous)"‘try"prove"negligence"at"time"of"death’"

20"
"
 2) By"way"of"mistake"to"negate"fault.""
• Where"a"person"was"voluntary"&"fulfils"the"requirements"of"the"fault"of"a"crime"he"can"still"
negate"it"by"making"a"mistake"that"did"not"allow"him"to"foresee"a"real"possibility."
• There"will"be"no"mens&rea"if:"
1. A"does"not"appreciate"that"he"is"killing"a"human."E.g."A"shoots"&"kills"B,"thinking"he"is"B’s"
dog."A"makes"a"mistake"of"fact"that"prevents"foresight.""
2. If"A"doesn’t"appreciate"that"his"act"will"cause"death"(mistake"of"law)."
3. If"A"doesn’t"appreciate"the"killing"is"unlawful"in"the"circumstances"(mistake"of"fact)."
(
o Mistake"of"fact:(
• Does"the"mistake"prevent"A"from"intention"extending"to"every"element"of"the"crime?"E.g."A"takes"
a"coat"leaving"a"party"that"looks"much"like"his"own"&"he"thinks"is"his"own,"he"thinks"it"is"his"own"
therefore"he"doesn’t"intend"to"take"another’s"property"(the"essential"element"of"theft)."
• Is"A’s"mistake"such"as"to"‘exclude"the"foresight"of"the"possibility"of"the"crime?’"Which"element"of"
the"crime"does"it"negate?"
• If"the"crime"is"one"that"requires"culpa&the"question"is,"whether"reasonable"man"in"the"accused"
circumstances"have"foreseen"the"unlawful"consequence"despite"the"mistake."For"instance"in"the"
case"of"Mbombela"the"mistake"could"not"have"prevented"a"reasonable"person"form"having"
foreseen"that"it"may"have"not"been"an"evil"spirit."
• Reasonableness"of"the"mistake"(De"Blom)"
(
o Abberatio&Ictus:(
• Means"‘going"astray"of"the"blow,’"i.e."the"consequences"are"different"to"what"the"accused"
expected."E.g."A"wishing"to"kill"B"misses"B"and"instead"kills"C.(
• There"will"be"full"intention"unlike"mistake,"as"the"accused"is"not"mistaken"by"their"victim.(
• This"is"not"a"legal"rule,"it"merely"describes"a"situation."It"cannot"therefore"negate"fault,"it"is"only"a"
method"of"alerting"one"to"the"fact"that"fault"is"an"issue.(
• 2"approaches:"before"&"after"the"vesari&doctrine"(Bernardus).(

PreU1965:(Doctrine(of(transferred(malice:(

Case:"R"v"Kuzwayo"1946"" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Abberatio&Ictus&pred1962."(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"was"an"assassin"for"hire"&"had"been"instructed"to"kill"a"particular"individual"as"he"came"out"
of"his"house."He"did"so"but"only"injured"his"victim,"he"then"fired"a"second"shot"which"killed"a"
passerby."He"was"charged"&"convicted"with"murder"by"the"court"a"quo."On"appeal"the"court"held"a"
person"who"intends"to"kill"&"does"so,"but"not"the"person"intended."Is"rightly"guilty"of"murder,"his"
intention"is"transferred"onto"the"unintended"victim." " " " " """"""""""""""""
Principle:(Through"the"doctrine"of"transferred"malice"the"A"is"guilty."

Case:"R"v"Koza"1949" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Abberatio&Ictus&pred1962."(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"instructed"his"8"year"old"daughter"to"place"poison"in"his"neighbour’s"medicine"which"he"
believed"he"would"drink."She"instead"put"it"into"a"water"drum"which"the"neighbours"child"drunk"from"
&"as"a"result"died."The"court"held"A"was"guilty"via"the"doctrine"of"transferred"malice,"even"without"

21"
"
having"to"prove"specific"intention."" " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Through"the"doctrine"of"transferred"malice"the"A"is"guilty."

PostU1965:(Concrete(intent(approach:(unlike"general"principles"of"fault"to"establish"if"there"was"fault"
in"respect"of"the"actual"victim."

Case:"R"v""mshiza"1970" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Abberatio&Ictus&postd1962."(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(Are"irrelevant."Held"that&abberatio&Ictus"is"no"more"than"a"convenient"expression"to"explain"
when"a"blow"goes"astray,"kuzwayo"&"koza"were"held"before"the"vesari&doctrine"was"taken"away."
Unless"we"can"prove"that"there"was"fault"in"respect"of"the"actual"victim,"there"will"be"no"conviction."
Principle:(Rejection"of"the"doctrine"of"transferred"malice,"to"favour"actual"intention."

Case:"R"v"Tissen"1979" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Abberatio&Ictus&postd1962."(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"fired"a"shot"at"a"person"on"a"busy"street"in"order"to"kill"them,"the"bullet"ricocheted"off"the"
street"&"injured"a"passerby."He"was"charged"with"attempted"murder"&"assault,"there"cannot"be"a"
negligent"assault"therefore"intention"is"not"needed."Held"that"since"it"was"a"busy"street"the"only"
inference"that"could"be"drawn"was"that"A"foresaw"a"real"possibility"that"another"person"could"get"
hurt,"A"was"convicted"for"assault"of"the"actual"victim." " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Use"objective"factors"to"make"subjective"inferences"about"the"accused"foresight."

Case:"R"v"Raisa"1979" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Abberatio&Ictus&postd1962."(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"woman"being"attacked"by"a"man"with"a"knife,"she"had"a"child"in"her"hands"&"tried"to"protect"
herself"with"the"child."Both"she"&"the"child"were"stabbed"but"neither"die,"A"is"charged"with"assult"
with"intent"to"do"grievous"bodily"harm."Mother"(dolus&directus)"&"child"(abberatio&Ictus),"however"
the"conviction"for"the"child"can"only"stand"if"we"can"prove"that"A"foresaw"a"real"possibility"the"child"
would"be"hurt."On"the"facts"it"could"not"be"shown"he"foresaw"she"would"put"the"child"in"harm’s"way.""
Principle:(Use"objective"factors"to"make"subjective"inferences"about"the"accused"foresight.(

o Mistake"of"law:(
• Is"made"when"an"accused"thinks"the"law"is"something"that"it"isn’t"or"when"an"accused"claims"
they"do"not"know"the"law."Mens&rea&must"extend"to"every"element"of"the"crime"so"if"you"cannot"
foresee"the"unlawfulness"as"you"do"not"know"the"law"this"is"not"possible."
• For"exam"purposes"there"will"always"be"a"legal"provision"&"the"facts"will"be"different."
• In"the"past"ignorance"of"the"law"was"never"an"excuse"&"everyone"was"presumed"to"know"the"
law."
• In"1977"the"case"of"‘De"Blom’"changed"this"&"did"away"with"policy"decisions"in"this"area."

Case:"S"v"De"Blom"1977" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Mistake"of"law."(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"woman"was"charged"with"contravening"exchange"control"regulations"for"taking"more"money"
&"jewellery"out"of"the"country"than"is"permitted."The"money"was"hidden"in"various"places"on"her"
person"&"luggage,"she"argued"that"she"didn’t"know"she"needed"permission"&"was"just"an"agent"for"
her"husband’s"dodgy"dealings."Held"the"’ignorant"principle’"can"no"longer"hold"in"our"law,"the"idea"of"
ignorance"of"the"law"goes"against"mens&rea.&Knowledge"of"wrongfulness"(foresight"of"a"real"

22"
"
possibility)"is"an"essential"element"of"a"crime,"there"is"no"punishment"in"law"without"a"crime,"a"
person"must"therefore"be"fully"valid"of"the"illegality"before"they"can"be"liable."They"are"not"saying"
the"accused"must"know"the"relevant"statute"&"section"of"contravention"or"that"what"the"accused"is"
doing"is"a"crime."The"accused"must"simply"know"what"they"are"doing"could"be"unlawful."In"order"to"
have"a"conviction"the"accused"must"have"realized"what"he"intends"to"do"could"be"unlawful"&"
reconciles"himself"to"that"possibility."In"terms"of"the"money"the"accused"knew"she"needed"
permission"to"take"it"out,"that"is"the"only"inference"that"could"be"made"on"the"facts"such"as"her"
hiding"the"money;"she"had"travelled"extensively,"her"inconsistent"replies"to"the"police"&"court."Her"
mistake"therefore"did"not"prevent"her"from"foreseeing"that"she"was"doing"something"unlawful."The"
jewellery"however,"the"court"held,"she"wore"more"than"the"average"woman,"she"had"taken"jewellery"
out"of"the"country"before"&"always"returned"with"it"&"on"this"basis"she"didn’t"foresee"the"
unlawfulness." " " " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""
Principle:(If"a"person"does"not"intend"to"act"unlawfully"they"cannot"be"liable,"as"it"does"not"extend"to"
every"element"of"the"crime."

• From"‘De"Blom’"we"can"see"that"a"bona&fide&mistake"of"law"can"exclude"intention"even"if"it"is"
unreasonable,"but"it"cannot"negate"negligence"that"the"accused"reasonably"made"the"error."Look"
at"objective"factors"against"the"alleged"‘lack"of"knowledge.’"
• Dolus:"The"accused"mistake"of"law"prevented"him"from"having"foresight"of"the"real"possibility"
that"the"thing"he"is"doing"is"wrongful/unlawful."“knowledge"of"the"unlawful"consequence”"
• Culpa:"The"accused"mistake"of"law"must"prevent"a"reasonable"person"from"having"foreseen"of"
the"possibility"that"the"thing"he"is"doing"is"wrongful/unlawful."“mistake"is"reasonable”"
• A"person"working"in"a"particular"sphere"(had"a"particular"knowledge)"should"know"the"rules"
(cannot"say"they"don’t"know)"within"their"sphere."

"Case:"S"v"Du"Toit"1981" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Mistake"of"law"with"specialist"knowledge."(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(During"a"global"petrol"shortage"a"man"purchased"petrol"&"carried"it"in"his"boot."Held"that"a"
motorist"should"acquaint"himself"with"regulations"especially"given"the"petrol"shortage."A"should"
have"known"there"were"drastic"regulations"&"should"foresee"carrying"petrol"without"a"permit"was"
unlawful."His"mistake"did"not"negate"fault,"culpa&held." " " " " """""""""""""""
Principle:("A"person"working"in"a"particular"sphere"should"know"the"rules"within"their"sphere"
(starosta"later"said"was"wrong"to"use"this"case"to"back"up"this"principle.)"

• Reliance"on"legal"advice."

Case:"S"v"Waglines"(Pty)"Ltd"1986" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Mistake"of"law"with"reliance"on"legal"advice."(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"was"charged"with"carrying"certain"goods"without"a"permit,"paper"bags"which"he"had"just"
obtained."The"company"had"consulted"a"legal"adviser"&"a"transport"consultant,"both"gave"him"wrong"
advice."Culpa&was"required;"the"court"held"that"it"was"an"unreasonable"mistake"as"the"company"
should"have"known"that"lawyers"often"disagree."Court"held"that"most"people"know"that"legal"advice"
is"simply"an"opinion"which"is"as"abundant"as"there"are"lawyers."Carting"is"full"of"regulations"&"only"
those"in"the"field"are"privy"to"them"unless"they"search"for"them."The"urgency"of"the"need"for"advice"
is"an"important"factor,"the"more"time"="the"less"excusable." " " " """""""""""""""
Principle:(Relying"on"one"lawyer’s"advice"is"not"sufficient"to"negate"negligence."

23"
"
Case:"S"v"Longdistance"1990" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:"Mistake"of"law"with"reliance"on"legal"advice,"&"in"a"specialized"field."(( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"was"charged"with"transporting"goods"illegally"after"relying"on"an"advocate’s"advice."Held"
that"legal"advice"has"no"magic"which"justifies"the"recipient"from"using"his"own"common"sense."On"
the"facts"the"lawyer’s"advice"was"so"bizarre"even"the"most"unintelligent"person"would"have"thought"
to"seek"advice"elsewhere."Further"A"had"received"further"warning"signals"as"he"had"been"stopped"
before"&"charged"with"the"same"offence."Since"A"was"engaged"in"a"specialized"field"it"was"their"duty"
to"acquaint"themselves"with"the"law."" " " " " " " " """""""""""""""
Principle:(Relying"on"one"lawyer’s"advice"is"not"sufficient"to"negate"negligence."

Case:"S"v"Classens"1992" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Mistake"of"law"with"reliance"on"legal"advice.(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"had"consulted"an"attorney"&"was"told"he"didn’t"contravene"statute."Held"a"client"should"be"
entitled"to"rely"on"the"advice"by"his"lawyer"BUT"in"the"same"vein"it"will"not"be"alright"if"other"factors"
indicate"the"advice"is"wrong,"this"will"depend"on"the"facts"of"each"case."" " " " """""""""""""""
Principle:(Relying"on"one"lawyer’s"advice"may"be"sufficient"to"negate"negligence"depending"on"facts."

o Statutory"mens&rea:(
• Statute"will"indicate"the"kind"of"fault"needed,"if"it"doesn’t"you"must"determine"the"form"of"mens&
rea&needed"from"the"statute."
• In"the"past"strict"liability"was"needed"(predvesari)"&"the"courts"didn’t"look"to"prove"fault."
• Today"(postdvesari)"we"cannot"assume"any"fault"is"sufficient,"we"assume"that"the"statute"did"
intend"some"form"of"mens&rea"to"exist."
• The"rules"for"determining"the"statutes"intent"are:"
1. Look"at"the"wording"of"the"statute."Willingly,"knowingly,"fraudulently,"ect."indicate"dolus.""
2. Look"at"the"language"used"in"the"clause."
3. Look"at"the"scope"&"object"of"the"clause:"the"higher"the"degree"of"harm,"the"lower"the"
degree"of"fault"as"courts"want"to"convict"criminals."
4. Look"at"the"nature"&"extent"of"punishment:"the"more"punishable"a"crime"the"more"fault"will"
be"needed"(dolus)"as"the"courts"favour"liberty."

Case:"S"v"Arenstein"1964" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Interpreting"statutory"crimes.(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"was"given"a"mandate"to"present"himself"for"interrogation,"he"failed"to"do"so."The"court"held"
negligence"was"sufficient"for"fault"from"the"statute." " " " " """"""""""""""""
Principle:(Look"at"the"wording"of"the"statute."

Case:"S"v"Unverdorben"1990" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Interpreting"statutory"crimes.(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"was"in"possession"of"pornographic"videos"which"were"illegal"at"the"time."Court"held"dolus&
was"required"for"fault."" " " " " """""""""""""" " " " """"""""""""""""
Principle:(Look"at"the"wording"of"the"statute."

24"
"
CAPACITY)invaluable))
• Is"negated"through"either"intoxication"or"provocation"(these"can"serve"to"negate"capacity,"
voluntariness"&"fault)."Everyone"is"presumed"to"have"capacity,"except"children"under"7,"the"onus"
is"on"the"accused"to"prove"their"incapacity."
• It"is"a"two"step"process"that"is"used"to"negate"capacity:"
a) Can"the"accused"appreciate"the"difference"between"right"&"wrong"(subjectively)."
b) Was"the"accused"able"to"act"in"accordance"with"that"appreciation?"
• Voluntariness:"the"ability"to"subject"ones"bodily"movements"to"ones"conscious"will."
• Intention:"Foresight"of"a"real"possibility"of"death/harm"&"acting"recklessly"to"that"knowledge."
"
o Intoxication:"
• Can"negate"either"the"(a)"or"(b)"requirement."
• Involuntary"acts,"i.e."a"substance"is"given"without"A’s"knowledge/consent,"must"be"distinguished"
from"voluntary"acts,"i.e."taking"the"substance"yourself."
• Voluntariness"is"a"higher"degree"of"blameworthiness."
• Links"to"antecedent"liability,"if"you"had"a"prior"knowledge"before"the"state,"then"the"prosecution"
can"prove"voluntariness."

"Case:"S"v"Hartyani"1980"" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Involuntary"intoxication.(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"had"a"number"of"beers"&"then"a"coffee"which"unbeknownst"to"him"was"laced"with"lots"of"
brandy."Held"he"did"not"know"that"he"was"drinking"alcohol,"acquitted." " " """"""""""""""
Principle:(Involuntary"intoxication"can"lead"to"a"lack"of"voluntariness."

• Voluntariness"is"divided"into"the"law"prior"to"1981"&"post"1981"in"accordance"with"the"Criminal"
Law"Amendment"Act."
• Prior"to"1981:"the"general"rule"was"that"liability"couldn’t"be"wholly"negated"by"intoxication."
There"was"use"of"ordinary"intent"crimes"that"sufficed"with"negligence."Therefore"one"could"get"a"
lower"crime"if"drunk"e.g."culpable"homicide"not"murder."Strong"policy"approach."
• S"v"Johnston"(see"in"voluntariness"section)"the"A"lacked"specific"intent,"but"this"term"was"not"
clearly"defined"(NOT"clear"criminal"principles).""
• R"v"Bourke"1916"“it"would"be"repulsive"to"the"community"at"large"to"give"a"drunken"person"
protection"under"the"law.”"
• Post"1981:"S"v"Chretein"(see"in"voluntariness"section)"A"alleged"that"he"lacked"fault,"he"believed"
that"the"people"would"move"out"of"the"way"&"that"he"was"far"enough"away"to"miss"them."Held"
that"it"was"possible"that"A"didn’t"see"the"possibility"the"people"would"move"out"of"the"way."He"
was"not"held"for"murder,"attempted"murder"(as"these"require"dolus)"&"assault"(there"is"no"
negligent"assault).""Held"there"can"be"no"conviction"on"any"crime"with"dolus."A"was"liable"for"1"
count"of"culpable"homicide."
• Chretein"tells"us"that"intoxication"can"negate"capacity,"voluntariness"&"fault."
• Culpa:"cannot"take"drunkenness"into"account"as"a"reasonable"man"knows"when"to"stop."
Intoxication"can"therefore"never"negate"negligence."
• Criminal"Law"Amendment"Act"S1(1):"was"created"in"response"to"Chretein"as"drunkards"can"
escape"liability."It"made"it"an"offence"to"use"lack"of"capacity"as"a"defence"for"intoxication."The"
elements"for"the"crime"are:"

25"
"
 1. Consumption"of"any"intoxicating"substance"by"A."
2. A’s"faculties"must"be"impaired"as"a"result,"i.e."he"cannot"appreciate"right/wrong"or"cannot"
act"in"accordance"with"this."
3. There"must"be"knowledge"that"the"substance"affects"faculties."
4. The"commission"of"an"offence"of"A"in"law."
5. A"would"in"normal"course"of"events"not"be"criminally"liable"under"the"common"law"due"to"
the"impaired"faculties."
• i.e."the"act"makes"it"so"that"if"you"would"be"acquitted"under"the"common"law"due"to"lack"of"
capacity,"you"will"receive"the"same"charge"you"would"have"anyway."
• Note:"under"this"act"Chretein"would"NOT"have"been"liable"as"he"didn’t"use"capacity"as"a"defence."
• The"best"defence"for"a"drunk"A"is"therefore"fault."
"
"
"
o Provocation"(severe"emotional"stress)"
• One"could"not"try"disproving"intention"using"provocation"as"it"shows"intention"rather"than"
negates"it."Voluntariness"would"also"be"difficult"to"negate"as"you"would"have"to"prove"you"are"a"
similar"state"to"‘dead"drunk.’"Capacity"is"therefore"most"important"defence"of"provocation."

Case:"S"v"Mokento"1971"" " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Provocation"with"a"factual"instance.(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A’s"brother"was"killed,"A"believed"a"woman"with"‘special"powers’"had"done"it,"when"he"
confronted"her"she"told"him"that"he"would"also"die."He"struck"her"over"the"head"with"a"stick"nearly"
decapitating"her."Head"the"court"was"fearful"of"using"provocation"as"a"defence"negating"intention"as"
it"seems"rather"to"show"intention." " " " " """"""""""""" " " ""
Principle:(One"could"not"try"disproving"intention"using"provocation"as"it"shows"intention"rather"than"
negates"it.(

• Provocation"is"an"act/insult"of"such"as"serious"nature"that"it"can"deprive"a"person"of"their"
ordinary"power"of"self"control."It"can"arise"from"extreme"stress"caused"by"anger,"fear"ect."
• In"the"past"the"courts"used"the"‘separate"doctrine"approach,’"&"was"not"seen"as"a"part"of"criminal"
law,"i.e."it"had"not"general"criminal"law"principles."A"would"be"held"from"crimes"requiring"
ordinary"intent,"i.e."they"would"get"lower"crimes."Provocation"could"never"be"a"full"defence,"but"
this"changed"after"Chretein."
• Today"we"used"the"general"principles"doctrine,"using"the"principles"of"capacity,"voluntariness"&"
intention."

Case:"S"v"Arnold"1985" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Provocation"to"negate"capacity.(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"was"a"41"year"old"man,"with"a"21"year"old"wife,"who"had"a"son"from"a"previous"marriage"
who"had"a"learning"disorder."A’s"wife"constantly"tried"to"convince"A"to"put"the"child"in"a"home,"her"
mother"also"lived"in"the"house,"she"would"often"not"return"home"at"night"&"A"suspected"she"was"
cheating."A"carried"a"gun"for"work"purposes"&"one"day"when"he"came"home"a"fight"ensued"when"the"
wife"told"A"she"wanted"to"return"to"stripping,"A"threw"his"gun"against"a"couch"&"it"discharged"a"
round,"he"then"picked"up"the"gun,"shot"&"killed"his"wife."Held"it"couldn’t"be"proven"beyond"a"
reasonable"doubt"A"had"acted"with"capacity,"&"it"was"possible"that"A"was"prevented"by"stress"to"act"

26"
"
in"accordance"with"the"knowledge"of"right/wrong."Accused"acquitted." " " """"""""""""""""
Criticism:("The"court"too"readily"accepted"A’s"testimony"&"his"say"so"“ipse&dixit.”" " """"""""""""""
Principle:(One"may"lack"capacity"by"means"of"provocation."

• Provocation"is"a"question"of"fact/a"state"of"affairs."
• Should"the"law"allow"self"help?"The"more"subjective"the"test"the"more"likely"hotdheaded"people"
will"be"rewarded"for"their"hotdheadedness."The"law"is"meant"to"prevent"not"justify"the"crime."

"Case:"S"v"Campher"1987" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Provocation"to"negate"capacity.(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"was"subjected"to"extensive"abuse,"she"had"been"married"for"9"months"but"had"a"9"year"old"
daughter"with"her"husband."The"husband"was"a"dove"keeper"&"insisted"A"cleaned"cages."On"the"day"
in"question"the"husband"had"threatened"A"with"a"screwdriver,"because"of"this"she"didn’t"hold"a"cage"
straight"&"a"hole"was"drilled"skew."He"then"told"her"to"get"on"her"knees"&"pray"the"hole"would"come"
straight."A"then"pulled"out"a"gun"&"shot"her"husband."Judge(A:(accepted"the"testimony"that"an"urge"
was"brought"about"by"abuse,"this"negated"her"capacity"to"act"in"accordance"with"her"appreciation"of"
wrongfulness."Judge(B:(On"the"facts"there"was"not"sufficient"evidence"that"A"lacked"the"capacity"to"
act"in"accordance"with"her"appreciation"of"wrongfulness,"she"may"have"if"she"made"a"stronger"case."
Judge(C:(found"you"could"only"show"a"lack"of"capacity"if"you"prove"a"mental"defect"(wrong)."A"was"
found"guilty." " " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""
Principle:(There"is"no"consistency"in"judgements"of"provocation."

Case:"S"v"Laubscher"1988" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Provocation"to"negate"capacity.(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"was"a"23"year"old"student"with"an"IQ"of"a"genius"&"had"got"married"against"his"wife’s"parents"
wishes."A"child"was"born"of"the"relationship,"&"the"wife"was"a"minor."On"the"day"in"question"her"
parents"refused"to"give"A"access"to"the"child"or"wife,"A"then"charged"through"the"house"discharging"
21"rounds,"killing"the"father,"&"then"getting"in"his"car"&"driving"away."Held"because"of"his"conduct"of"
driving"away"after"the"incident"he"cannot"negate"provocation." " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(It"is"possible"for"provocation"to"achieve"acquittal.""

Case:"S"v"Wiid"1990" " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Provocation"to"negate"capacity.(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"had"been"married"for"32"years"&"had"2"children,"one"mentally"retarded"&"the"other"
paralyzed"with"a"speech"impediment"after"a"motordcycle"accident,"she"cared"for"them"both."A’s"
husband"had"numinous"affairs"&"often"didn’t"come"home."The"day"after"she"expected"another"affair"
had"started"a"friend"came"over"to"consul"her,"&"dinner"she"consulted"her"husband,"he"tried"to"get"a"
tapedrecorder"which"he"had"made"of"the"fights."A"scuffle"ensued"&"A"gets"hit"over"the"head"&"passes"
out,"when"she"regains"consciousness"she"gets"a"gun"&"shoots"her"husband."Court"look"at"the"fact"
that"A"said"‘what"have"I"done’"&"that"she"looked"bewildered"&"disorientated"after"the"shooting."She"
was"also"not"able"to"recall"the"shooting."Evidence"was"that"she"had"not"eaten"much,"consumed"
alcohol"&"was"on"sedatives,"this"coupled"with"the"blow"to"the"head."She"was"acquitted.""""""""""""""""
Principle:(It"is"possible"for"provocation"to"achieve"acquittal."

Case:"S"v"Moses"1996" " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Provocation"to"negate"capacity.(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"was"in"a"homodrelationship"with"the"deceased,"after"unprotected"sex"the"deceased"

27"
"
announced"he"had"AIDS."A"got"angry"&"attacked"the"deceased"with"an"ornament;"he"then"ran"to"the"
kitchen"picking"up"a"knife"&"stabbed"the"deceased."He"runs"back"to"the"kitchen"and"grabs"a"bigger"
knife"&"slits"the"deceased’s"wrists"&"throat."A"alleged"he"knew"that"he"was"doing"but"couldn’t"stop"
himself."A"had"also"tried"to"remove"fingerprints"from"the"ornament"&"clean"the"blood"stains,"he"then"
picked"up"a"hitchdhiker"to"try"create"an"alibi"by"seducing"him."Physiologists"didn’t"discredit"that"A"had"
acted"in"a"sane"automatic"state"at"the"time,"A"found"not"guilty.""""""""""""""" "" " """""""""""""""""
Principle:(It"is"possible"for"provocation"to"achieve"acquittal."

Case:"S"v"Eadie"2002" " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Provocation"to"negate"capacity.(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"was"an"avid"sportsman"&"after"consuming"alcohol"at"a"sports"club"he"decided"to"drive"home."
An"altercation"ensued"with"another"driver,"&"both"cars"stopped,"A"walked"up"the"other"car"with"a"
hockey"stick"&"starts"hitting"the"door"with"the"stick"till"it"breaks,"he"then"pulls"the"driver"out"of"the"
car"&"severely"beats"him,"killing"the"driver."When"the"assault"was"complete"A’s"wife"picked"up"A"&"
they"both"went"home,"hours"later"A"returned"&"disposes"of"the"hockey"stick,"a"truck"driver"passes"by"
but"A"acts"like"it"was"a"simple"accident."The"police"arrive"as"A"is"disposing"of"his"pants,"they"ask"him"
for"his"pants"but"he"gives"them"a"clean"pair."A’s"defence"was"that"he"was"provoked"&"he"was"
suffering"from"stress"from"work"&"his"failing"marriage."The"courts"show"distaste"in"a"purely"
subjective"test"to"provocation."Held"there"is"no"difference"between"voluntariness"&"capacity,"
therefore"treat"provocation"like"sane"automatism"&"look"at"objective"factors"for"antecedent"liability"
(conduct"before"&"after"the"incident"are"important"factors)."When"A"acts"in"an"aggressive"&"focused"
manner"which"may"well"have"been"spread"spurred"on"by"anger"or"another"emotion,"if"A"can"still"
appreciate"right/wrong"&"physically"control"his"body"to"his"will"he"cannot"say"that"at"some"stage"he"
lost"control."On"the"facts"there"was"nothing"unusual"about"A’s"provocation"or"stress,"other"people"
also"deal"with"these"things"but"it"doesn’t"give"them"a"right"to"kill." " " """"""""""""""
Principle:(Provocation"can"only"be"used"as"a"defence"if"it"prevents"A"from"subjecting"his"bodily"
movements"to"his"conscious"will."

• Eadie"adds"an"objective"element"of"the"surrounding"circumstances"to"a"subjective"test."

JUNE(EXAM(2011(

UNLAWFULNESS)
• Unlawfulness"is"a"concept"that"embraces"disproving"judgement"of"an"act"by"the"law.""
• This"element"relates"to"whether"conduct,"causation"or"voluntariness"is"justifiable."The"question"is"
whether"the"accused"that"has"satisfied"the"elements"of"a"crime"was"justified"in"doing"so?"
• "In"practice"the"state"will"not"try"prove"this,"it"will"simply"be"inferred"&"assumed"from"inferences"
as"it"is"generally"prime"farce"unlawful"to"commit"a"crime."The"courts"will"make"a"value"judgement"
of"unlawfulness"after"looking"at"the"facts.""
• Grounds"of"justification"(GOJ)"are"accepted"defences"to"having"committed"a"crime,"which"can"
negate"unlawfulness,"this"is"an"objective"test"which"looks"at"the"circumstances"&"objective"factors"
in"the"accused"position.""
• Defences"negating"Mens&Rea"can"be"limited"if"the"crime"is"a"strict"liability"crime"(fault)"i.e"if"mens&
rea"isn’t"required"in"the"first"place,"that"in"itself"excludes"the"possibility"of"any"possible"defence."
• "There"is"never"a"crime"that"doesn’t"require"unlawfulness"&"one"is"never"prevented"from"raising"a"
GOJ."GOJ"only"go"towards"negating"unlawfulness"not"either"form"of"mens&rea."

28"
"
• The"state"bares"the"onus"to"prove"every"element"of"the"crime,"the"accused"however"has"a"
evidentiary"burden"to"adduce"some"kind"of"evidence"for"a"GOJ,"on"a"balance"of"probability."After"
this"the"state"must"disprove,"beyond"a"reasonable"doubt,"the"GOJ."

Grounds(of(Justification"

1. Private(Defence(
• Is"a"holistic/broad"concept,"it"encapsulates"the"narrow"concept"of"self,"property"and"
defence"of"another."
• Where"X"is"faced"with"an"imminent"attack"
upon"a"legally"protected"interest"&"that" DEFENCE(
attack"upon"X"is"unlawful,"X"acts"against"the"
attack"reasonably"against"the"attacker"&" 1) Necessary."
does"whatever"is"necessary"to"avert"the" 2) Reasonable"(proportional)."
h ATTACK(
a 3) Directed"at"the"attacker."
r 1) Imminence,"the"attack"must"have"
4) A"must"prove"he"was"acting"in"
m begun"but"not"be"completed.""
private"defence."
." "
2) There"has"to"be"a"legally"protected" • NB"this"is"an"OBJECTIVE"test."
interest."
""" 3) Attack"must"be"unlawful."

" "

"

"

"

"

Case:"S"v"Hele"1947" " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Test"for"private"defence.(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(Not"important." " " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""
Principle:(A"court"must"put"itself"in"the"position"of"the"accused"&"view"the"matter"in"light"of"the"
circumstances"of"the"case,"this"is"an"objective"enquiry"as"to"reasonableness."

Case:"S"v"Mugwena"" " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Test"for"private"defence.(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(Not"important."" " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(The"law"insists"on"a"strict"limit"when"taking"life"&"killing"in"self"defence"is"only"justified"if"
objectively"speaking"all"elements"of"private"defence"are"met."Whether"the"elements"are"met"is"
drawn"from"objective"factors,"it"is"not"about"what"the"accused"thought."Courts"will"place"themselves"
in"the"accused"position,"some"things"may"be"reasonable"to"a"specific"case"e.g."size"of"weapon."

o ATTACK(

Imminence"

• An"attack"must"have"begun"&"not"yet"complete"or"be"imminent."Generally"when"an"attack"is"
anticipated"predemptive"attack"is"not"necessary,"likewise"if"the"attack"is"complete"&"defensive"
steps"are"taken"(revenge/retaliation)"a"defence"cannot"be"raised.""

29"
"
 • Fear"alone"is"not"sufficient,"an"actual"attack"must"have"commenced"(Patel)."This"means"there"
must"be"reasonable"grounds"for"believing"that"there"is"an"imminent"attack,"subjective"fear"is"
insufficient."
• Imminence"is"divided"into"self"defence"&"private"defence"(defence"of"property).""
• Defence(of(property:"generally"one"may"use"deadly"force"to"protect"their"property/interest"in"
property,"if"the"thief"is"running"away"they"may"use"force"to"apprehend"them."One"may"use"force"
to"prevent"damage"to"ones"property."

Case:"S"v"Van"Wyk"1967" " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Imminence"in"relation"to"property.(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"was"a"shop"owner"who"had"experienced"a"number"of"robberies"and"had"tried"a"number"of"
methods"to"prevent"them."As"a"last"resort"he"set"a"trap"at"the"door,"an"armed"shotgun,"pointing"
towards"the"floor"of"the"door"&"placed"a"warning"sign"on"the"door.""An"intruder"entered"&"was"shot"
&"later"died,"A"was"charged"with"murder."State"argued"there"was"no"imminence,"the"question"was"if"
a"person"could"set"a"trap"in"defence"of"property"&"could"the"imminence"rule"be"relaxed?""""""""""""""""""""
AJ(Stein:(Deadly"force"is"sometimes"necessary"to"protect"property."The"property"of"the"owner"will"
not"always"be"of"lesser"value"than"the"life"of"the"assailant,"therefore"proportionality"must"be"relaxed"
to"a"certain"extent."A"is"entitled"to"used"private"defence." " " " " """"""""""
AJ(Rump:(There"will"be"times"when"individuals"are"entitled"to"use"deadly"force"to"protect"property"
but"the"moment"the"trap"was"set"off"was"not"an"imminent"attack."A"person"who"employ’s"a"
trap/device"only"has"the"same"scope"to"act"as"he"would"have"had"if"he"had"been"there."A"is"not"
entitled"to"use"private"defence."" " " " " " " " """""""
AJ(Trollope:(looked"at"whether"the"trap"was"reasonable"&"necessary"in"the"circumstance"to"protect"
property,"the"state"has"the"onus"to"disprove"this."If"A"had"been"there"the"killing"would"have"been"
justified."The"setting"of"a"trap"has"to"be"seen"as"another"protective"mechanism"e.g."barbed"wire."
Held"the"trap"was"the"only"means"available"to"him"at"the"time"based"on"objective"factors,"&"
therefore"was"reasonable"&"necessary,"A"acquitted." " " " " """"""
Principle:(Exception/relaxation/broadening"to"imminence"rule"for"property."A"measure"of"last"resort"
such"that"something"is"inevitable"can"mean"something"is"imminent.""

• If"the"attack"is"complete,"the"conduct"amounts"to"retaliation,"exception:"

Case:"S"v"Mogholwane"1982" " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Imminence"in"relation"to"property.(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(M"is"walking"home"with"a"packet"containing"his"food,"clothes"and"shoes,"X"grabs"it,"M"tries"to"
hold"on"but"X"pulls"out"an"axe,"M"then"runs"home"grabs"a"knife"&"returns"and"stabs"X,"killing"him."
State"argued"attack"was"complete,"therefore"no"imminence."Held"even"though"initial"attack"was"
over,"theft"is"a"continuing"offence"as"long"as"X"has"the"property,"was"the"time"between"running"
home"&"back"long"enough"to"break"the"chain"of"causation."Held"no,"not"everyone"can"use"deadly"
force,"it"must"be"clear"the"force"is"not"retaliation"&"is"necessary." " " """""""""""""""""
Principle:(Deadly"force"may"be"used"to"retrieve"stolen"property"as"long"as"it"is"part"of"the"same"
unlawful"taking,"so"that"the"period"of"time"may"be"regarded"as"defence"&"not"retaliation"subject"to"
reasonableness"&"necessity."

Case:"S"v"Stephen"1928"" " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Imminence"in"relation"to"property.( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(S"was"sleeping"when"he"heard"an"intruder"coming"through"the"window."S"grabbed"a"knife"&"
stabbed"him"in"the"chest,"he"alleged"he"was"going"for"the"arm,"killing"him."Charged"with"CH,"the"
court"held"a"person"may"resist"invasion"of"property"using"violent,"even"deadly"force,"but"their"force"
applied"must"be"commensurate"with"the"force"opposed."Before"one"can"use"deadly"force"one"must"
call"on"their"attacker"(not"literally),"S"did"not"he"is"therefore"guilty,"1"week"in"jail." " """""""""""
Principle:(There"must"be"evidence"of"some"objective"attack,"the"owner"must"at"least"call"out."

30"
"
 Trespassing"is"not"sufficient"to"use"deadly"force."Courts"will"punish"socially"reprehensible"behaviour,"
even"if"on"a"lower"sentence.""

• Imminence"in"relation"to"self"defence."

Case:"S"v"Patal"1959"" " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Imminence"in"relation"to"self"defence.( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(P"was"visited"by"his"brother"(B),"one"evening"as"he"was"coming"down"the"stairs"X"was"
murdering"B"with"a"hammer"&"about"to"throw"the"final"blow."P"drew"a"firearm"&"shot"the"X,"he"was"
charged"with"CH"as"he"exceeded"the"bounds"of"defence"as"he"could"have"done"something"else."
Objective"factors"looked"at"the"court"held"that"even"though"P"could"have"done"something"else"they"
cannot"be"armchair"critics."The"defence"utilized"may"be"so"only"if"it’s"objectively"the"only"means"
available"at"the"time."" " " " " " " " " """"""""""
Principle:(Fear"of"an"attack"is"not"sufficient"it"must"be"imminent,"P"must"have"ground"to"believe"he"
or"another"is"in"danger."Private"defence"may"extend"to"a"3rd"party."

• Battered(Woman(Syndrome:(where"a"person"eventually"‘snaps.’"There"is"no"imminent"attack.(
• Is"private"defence"able"to"be"used"then"for"an"attack"that"is"not"imminent?(
• Provocation"is"a"better"defence,"however"objective"evidence"is"required"(Eadie)"with"cannot"
always"be"found.(

Case:"S"v"Engelbrecht"2005"" " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Imminence"in"relation"to"self"defence.( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(E"was"systematically"abused"by"her"husband."One"night"after"he"had"been"drinking"&"passed"
out"she"wrapped"a"plastic"bag"around"her"head"suffocating"him,"charged"with"murder."Held"there"
was"no"imminent"attack,"(1)"the"general"rule"is"that"where"one"is"subject"to"extended"periods"of"
abuse"&"eventually"retaliates""while"the"persons"back"is"turned/they"sleep,"they"cannot"rely"on"self"
defence""due"to"lacking"imminence,"it"would"be"better"to"prove"provocation."(2)"The"test"is"
objective,"this"implies"the"reasonable"man"must"be"placed"in"E’s"position."If"the"imminence"rule"may"
be"relaxed"in"respect"of"property"(Van"Wyk)"then"why"not"for"individuals."Therefore"where"the"
abuse"is"so"frequent/regular"it"can"be"termed"as"a"pattern,"imminence"should"extend"to"encompass"
the"abuse"that"is"inevitable,"predmeditation"will"not"be"inconsistent"with"private"defence."""""""""
Principle:"In"certain"situations"imminence"may"be"relaxed"if"an"act"happens"often"
enough/repeatedly."

Against(a(Legally(Protected(Interest(

• An"interest"protected"by"law"i.e."life"&"limb,"property,"3rd"party"(even"without"a"special"
relationship).(

Case:"S"v"Laubscher"1988" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Legally"protected"interest.(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(See"above."L"alleged"he"was"acting"in"private"defence"of"a"legally"protected"interest"of"access"
(court"order)."Held"there"was"no"interest"under"attack,"it"is"undesirable"to"extend"private"defence"to"
use"force"to"ward"off"attack"to"life/limb"&"property." " " " " """"""""
Principle:(Rights"granted"by"court"order"cannot"be"protected"by"private"defence,"the"appropriate"
remedy"is"contempt"of"court.""

Unlawful(

• The"attack"on"the"accused"must"be"objectively"unlawful"to"trigger"defensive"steps.(

31"
"
 • Putative(private(defence:(Where"objectively"speaking"there"was"no"imminent/unlawful"attack"
but"the"accused"genuinely"thought"there"was."This"is"similar"to"mistake"of"fact,"it"goes"towards"
negating"INTENTION."The"accused"therefore"argues"they"didn’t"intend"to"act"unlawfully.(
• What"if"objectively"the"element"don’t"exist"but"are"perceived"to,""then"the"defendant"cannot"
rely"on"private"defence,"therefore"unlawfulness"is"proven"as"any"defensive"steps"taken"are"
unlawful."Putative"private"defence"goes"towards"negating"culpability"(dolus/culpa)"not"
unlawfulness."If"dolus"doesn’t"exist"then"liability"as"a"whole"is"excluded."

Case:"S"v"De"Oliveira"1993"" " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Putative"private"defence.( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(D"and"his"girlfriend"(C)"were"sleeping"in"the"afternoon,"when"C"was"awoken"by"4"unidentified"
men"walking"up"the"driveway."The"gate"was"easy"to"access"&"was"in"a"bad"neighbourhood."C"wakes"
up"D"who"gets"his"gun"out"of"his"safe"&"fires"7"shots"at"the"men,"killing"one"&"injuring"another."The"
injured"was"a"friend"&"trusted"employee"while"X"was"his"brother,"when"D"realized"he"immediately"
rendered"assistance."At"appeal"the"court"looked"at"if"putative"private"defence"could"be"used,"i.e."did"
D"intend"to"act"unlawfully"by"dolus/culpa.""D’s"subjective"intention"is"determined"by"making"
inferences"from"objective"factors."1)"The"area"was"a"dangerous"one,"but"there"was"no"indication"of"
an"imminent"attack."2)"D"was"in"a"position"of"safety"in"his"home"(locked"doors"ect)."Held"no"
reasonable"man"would"have"thought"they"were"entitled"to"kill"to"protect"their"life."D"then"argued"he"
lacked"intention"as"he"was"half"asleep,"but"this"was"rejected"as"he"had"to"enter"a"complicated"code"
into"his"safe."D"had"dolus&eventualis,"&"was"therefore"guilty." " " " """""""""""""
Principle:(The"accused"must"truly"believe"they"are"in"danger,"from"objective"factors."

Case:"S"v"Joshua"2003"" " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Putative"private"defence.( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(J"&"wife"were"walking"when"4"men"robbed"them,"J"ran"home"grabbing"a"shotgun"and"
returned"killing"3"men"&"injuring"the"other,"who"then"fled"&"was"chased"by"J."They"arrived"at"a"
house"of"a"3rd"party,"J"then"killed"the"3rd"party"his"friend"&"his"dog.""Held"at"the"park"J"had"the"right"
to"protect"himself"from"the"attackers,"evidence"however"showed"the"men"were"shot"in"their"sides"
(no"objective"imminent"attack)."J"could"however"use"putative"private"defence"&"it"was"reasonable"
for"him"to"believe"his"life"was"in"danger,"acquitted"of"murder"for"the"3"men"in"the"park,"held"for"CH"
as"he"couldn’t"prove"a"reasonable"man"would"have"acted"the"same."Held"at"the"house"both"parties"
were"shot"in"the"back"&"didn’t"know"J,"there"was"no"threat"&"no"putative"private"defence,"held"for"2"
counts"of"murder." " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"For"putative"private"defence"the"accused"must"truly"believe"they"are"in"danger.""

Case:"Mugwena"v"Minister"of"Safety"&"Security"2005"" " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Putative"private"defence.( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(M(deceased)"was"a"police"officer,"was"at"home"on"his"day"off,"a"number"of"officers"from"his"
precinct"who"were"looking"for"a"“Masala”"came"to"M’s"home"&"knocked"on"his"door.""The"police"
alleged"they"identified"themselves"&"heard"a"click"of"a"gun"behind"the"door,"the"door"then"flung"
open"&"M"appeared"gun"drawn"and"trailed"his"gun"towards"the"voices."The"police"grabbed"M"from"
behind,"but"he"broke"free"&"pointed"the"gun"at"an"officers"head,"the"police"then"opened"fire"killing"
him."M’s"wife"alleged"it"was"night"&"they"did"not"identify"themselves,"M"drew"his"gun"for"safety"&"M"
trailed"his"gun"because"he"could"not"see"properly."M"could"have"killed"one"of"the"officers"but"didn’t"
(no"threat)"&"so"private"defence"cannot"be"used"by"the"police."Putative"defence"can"be"raised"but"it"
is"an"objective"test,"M"was"a"officer"at"the"same"station,"he"would"have"known"them"if"they"had"
identified"themselves,"it"was"dark"&"M"would"only"see"silhouettes"&"it"was"reasonable"to"trail"his"
gun,"he"didn’t"pose"a"threat"&"didn’t"need"to"be"grabbed,"&"M"was"outnumbered"4"to"1."The"police"
story"was"not"favoured,"the"onus"was"on"them"to"prove"of"a"balance"the"conduct"was"reasonable,"or"
that"they"truly"believed"they"were"in"danger,"they"could"not."" """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Subjective"inferences"are"made"by"looking"at"objective"factors."

32"
"
 o DEFENCE((

Necessary("

• No"other"means"available,"cant"ward"off"in"any"other"way"(Patel)(Van"Wyk)."
• If"you"have"to"react"in"the"only"means"available,"is"the"victim"obliged"to"retreat"if"they"can?"

Case:"S"v"Zikalala"1953"""" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Necessity."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(Z"was"in"a"crowded"bar"when"an"altercation"ensued"&"X"attacked"Z"with"a"knife."Evidence"was"
Z"had"dodged"2"blows"before"shooting,"&"killing"X."Trail"court"held"where"a"man"may"flee"he"should"
rather"than"kill,"as"Z"had"dodged"2"blows"already"he"could"have"dodged"more,"therefore"guilty."
Appeal"held"liberty"is"favoured"&"the"state"must"prove"beyond"a"reasonable"doubt"Z"could"escape."
This"was"a"crowded"bar"&"movement"was"difficult,"the"law"doesn’t"impose"a"risk"for"them"to"be"
stabbed"in"the"back"(haha)"or"else"Z"may"have"been"the"deceased"in"this"case." """""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:("There"is"no"general"obligation"on"the"victim"to"flee"unless"circumstances"predict"it"was"
more"reasonable"to"do."Necessity"does"not"mean"one"must"retreat,"state"must"show"a"safe"escape"
was"guaranteed."

• If"an"attack"can"be"avoided"by"escape/retreat"the"law"may"require"the"accused"to"retreat"only"if"
a"safe"escape"can"be"guaranteed,"without"risking"a"blow"to"the"back."

Reasonableness((Proportionality)(

• When"defending"property,"proportionality"between"property"&"the"nature"of"interest"impaired"
is"not"needed"(Van"Wyk)."
• Self"defence"must"have"a"rough"approximation"between"the"gravity"of"the"attack"and"the"style"
&"nature"of"the"defence."

Case:"S"v"T"1986" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Reasonableness."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(T"was"a"young"boy"who"was"often"bullied"by"X"as"he"was"younger,"smaller,"more"sensitive."On"
the"day"X"&"friends"came"to"T’s"house"&"called"on"him"to"come"fight,"when"T"refused"X"came"into"
the"house"grabbing"T."T"then"pulled"out"a"gun"and"shot"X,"killing"him."Trail"court"held"the"conduct"
was"not"reasonable"&"T"was"guilty."Appeal"court"held"the"rights"of"a"child"to"self"defence"are"the"
same"as"adults."They"felt"the"court"a&quo&was"to"strict"in"obligating"T"to"use"some"other"means,"the"
correct"method"is"to"see"not"if"T"is"in"danger"of"his"life"but"if"T"can"prevent"being"injured/maimed,"
even"by"way"of"deadly"force."A"measure"of"subjectivity"must"be"included"in"this"objective"test,"the"
reasonable"man"must"be"placed"in"the"circumstances."Factors"like"i)"nature"of"the"attack,"ii)"interest"
threatened,"iii)"relationship"of"the"parties,"iv)"age/sex/gender/size/strength/location"ect."Looking"at"
weaponry"the"court"held"an"attacker"cannot"be"allowed"to"choose"his"mode"of"defence,"it"must"be"
judged"on"a"case"by"case"basis,"T"acquitted." " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(The"right"to"bodily"integrity"is"not"subsidiary"to"the"right"to"life."

• You"must"establish"what"is"reasonable"in"the"circumstances."

Case:"S"v"Ntuli"1975" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Reasonableness."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(N/A" " " " " " " " " " """"""""""
Principle:(Where"a"victim"acts"in"self"defence"knowing"they"are"using"excessive"force"which"may"
result"in"death"&"act"reckless"to"this"knowledge,"they"are"guilty"of"murder."

Case:"S"v"Govender"2007" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Reasonableness."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

33"
"
 Facts:(G"went"to"X’s"house"to"gamble,"during"which"G"experienced"heavy"losses."X"eventually"asked"
for"a"‘free"call’"to"recoup"his"losses"but"was"refused,"an"altercation"ensued."Friends"of"X"held"that"G"
accosted"X""&"drew"a"firearm,"X"then"drew"his"firearm"&"G"shot"him,"G"then"picked"up"X’s"weapon"&"
shot"him"in"the"mouth."G"alleged"that"he"was"trying"to"leave"the"premises"when"X"accosted"him,"&"
drew"his"gun"causing"G"to"shoot"to"protect"himself"(self"defence)."G’s"story"was"the"more"creditable,"
&"court"held"the"other"version"was"unconvincing,"but"G"must"still"act"reasonably."G"was"justified"in"
defending"himself"by"shooting"1"or"more"times"provided"it"is"reasonable,"evidence"showed"at"some"
point"X"fell"down,"the"shot"from"X’s"weapon"to"the"mouth"was"not"justified,"G"held"guilty.""""""""
Principle:(The"attacked"may"become"the"attacker,"force"after"initial"attack"="exceeding"bounds"of"
defence."

• Directed"at"attacker"&"awareness"of"self"defence"will"not"be"discussed"further.""
"
2. Necessity(
• This"is"an"objective"test."
• It"permits"a"person"who"in"order"to"avoid"harm"in"certain"circumstances"to"commit"what"would"
otherwise"be"a"crime."I.e."where"a"person"is"faced"with"2"evils"in"an"emergency"&"chooses"the"
lesser"of"the"2,"&"breaks"the"law"to"do"this.""
• Define:(A"person"acts"in"necessity"if"they"act"in"their/another’s"legal"interest"which"is"
endangered"by"an"imminent"threat"&"cannot"be"avoided"in"any"other"way,"provided"they"are"
not"required"to"endure"the"danger"&"the"interest"protected"is"not"out"of"proportion"to"the"
illegal"act.""
• Elements:((1)Danger"to"a"legally"protected"interest" " " " " "
" " 2)"Endangered"by"a"threat"(imminent/commenced)" " `" "
" " 3)Not"caused"by"A’s"fault"" " " " " " "
" " 4)"Which"A"is"not"obliged"to"endure" " " " " "
" " 5)"Which"was"necessary"to"avert"danger"" " " " "
" " 6)"Means"used"are"reasonable"in"the"circumstances(
• Agency:(either"by"nonhuman"factors"e.g."emergency"or"by"human"factor"e.g."duress/compulsion(
• Similarities"to"Private"defence."(i)"Both"serve"to"make"otherwise"unlawful"acts"lawful,"(ii)"
resorted"to"protect"legally"recognised"interests,"(iii)"both"require"their"dangers"to"be"imminent,"
(iv)"must"be"reasonable/necessary,"(v)"must"act"in"proportion."
• Differences"from"private"defence:"

Necessity( Private(Defence(
Evil"to"self"&"evil"to"another" Evil"to"self"&"evil"to"an"unlawful"attacker"
No"attack"required,"threat"is"sufficient"" An"imminent"attack"is"required"
Can"be"human"or"nonhuman" Must"be"a"human"attack"
Directed"at"an"innocent"party" Directed"at"the"attacker"
1)"Danger"to"a"legally"protected"interest"

Case:"R"v"Canestra"1951" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Danger"to"a"legally"protected"interest."""""""""(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(C"was"a"fisherman"who"caught"million"of"fish,"of"which"fish"under"a"certain"size"were"illegal"to"
catch."Evidence"was"he"caught"60000"fish"of"which"only"about"100"were"illegal"&"C"was"charged"with"
contravening"legislation."C"argues"economic"necessity"as"he"has"a"family"to"feed,"however"according"
to"his"a"thief"can"be"justified"to"feed"their"family,"therefore"C"cannot"use"economic"necessity."
Principle:(Economic"necessity"cannot"contravene"a"rule"of"law.""

Case:"S"v"Adams;"S"v"Werner"1981" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Danger"to"a"legally"protected"interest."""""""""(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:"A’s"wife"was"pregnant"during"apartheid"(group"areas"act"was"in"place)."A,"a"coloured"man,"

34"
"
 moved"into"a"white"area"&"argued"it"was"a"necessity"as"this"place"was"cheaper"than"where"he"was"
designated"to"live."Again"the"court"held"economic"necessity"could"not"apply."" " """"""""""""""""""
Principle:(Economic"necessity"cannot"contravene"a"rule"of"law.""

• Life"&"limb,"bodily"injury"&"property"could"all"be"protectable"interests"under"this"area."

2)"Endangered"by"a"threat"(imminent/commenced)"

• No"attack"is"required,"generally"a"threat"that"is"imminent"is"established"on"how"probable"it"is"
that"the"threat"will"be"realized."

Case:"S"v"Kibi"1978" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Endangered"by"a"threat"(imminent/commenced)."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(K"was"arrested"&"detained"to"answer"for"certain"charges."In"his"testimony"he"lied"(prudery)"&"
he"claimed"this"was"necessary"as"the"police"tortured"him"into"giving"it."Evidence"showed"the"police"
only"interrogated"him"on"1"day"&"the"trail"lasted"11,"there"was"therefore"no"explicit"ongoing"threat"
&"it"was"not"very"probable"to"come"into"effect." " " " " " """""""""""
Principle:("In"order"for"the"imminence"requirement"to"be"met"the"A"must"experience"an"explicit,"
ongoing"threat"(probability"of"the"threat"being"put"into"effect"is"strong)."""

Case:"S"v"Mandela"2001" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Endangered"by"a"threat"(imminent/commenced)."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(M"killed"a"friend"&"alleged"that"someone"had"contacted"him"on"the"phone"&"told"him"to"do"it"
or"his"family"would"be"killed."Court"accepted"that"a"threat"existed,"but"it"was"not"imminent,"M"
should"have"gone"to"the"police"before"his"actions"were"necessary."M"was"not"‘bugged’"or"being"
followed,"he"could"have"even"warned"the"victim." " " " " """""""""""""""""
Principle:(A"must"try"to"terminate"the"necessity"in"some"way,"even"if"unsuccessful,"before"an"
ongoing"threat"exists."

• Battered"woman"syndrome:"to"argue"necessity"they"should"first"go"to"the"police,"even"if"
unsuccessful"before"imminence"is"fulfilled."

3)"Not"caused"by"the"A’s"fault"

Case:"S"v"Bradbury"1967" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Not"caused"by"the"A’s"fault."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(B"was"a"member"of"a"dangerous"gang,"he"was"asked"to"participate"in"the"planning"of"a"
murder,"fearing"if"he"didn’t"oblige"his"family"would"be"in"danger"he"did"so."He"was"convicted"&"
sentenced"to"death,"in"appeal"he"argues"necessity."Held"that"as"a"general"rule"that"a"person"who"
enters"voluntarily"into"a"gang,"fully"knowing"of"their"disciplinary"code,"cannot"argue"necessity"as"you"
created"the"situation."" " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""
Principle:(If"you"create"the"situation"you"cannot"argue"necessity."

Case:"S"v"Mohomed"1938" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Not"caused"by"the"A’s"fault."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(M"abducted"&"sexually"assaulted"a"young"girl."On"the"day"in"question"the"police"arrived"at"
M’s"house"&"tried"to"arrest"him."At"the"same"time"a"mob"of"civilians"arrived"with"the"girls’"family,"
one"of"which"M"knew"to"own"a"gun."M"refused"to"come"out"of"the"house"(resisting"arrest"&"
obstructing"the"ends"of"justice)."M"argues"necessity"&"the"court"held"a"man"is"innocent"until"proven"
guilty,"it"therefore"cannot"be"said"he"created"the"situation,"there"was"therefore"an"imminent"threat"
which"was"not"made"by"his"conduct"&"he"could"use"necessity."" " " " """"""""""""""
Principle:(Where"A"acts"negligently"it"is"likely"they"must"still"use"necessity,"an"A"may"act"out"of"
necessity"to"avoid"anticipated"danger"(opposite"form"private"defence)."

35"
"
4)"Which"A"is"not"obliged"to"endure"

• So"far"we"have"learnt"economic"hardship"must"be"endured"(Adams)("Canestra),"&"a"situation"
which"you"created"must"be"endured"(Bradbury),"&"people"cannot"avert"danger"inherent"in"their"
duty"e.g."firemen/police/soldiers"(Kibi)."

5)"Which"was"necessary"to"avert"danger""

• Killing"for"necessity"must"be"reasonable"in"the"circumstances,"i.e."where"the"protected"interest"
>"the"interest"infringed."However"when"people"kill"it"seems"these"two"interests"are"equal.""

Case:"R"v"Dudley"&"Stephens"1884"(English"case)"""" " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Necessity."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"ship"went"adrift"&"the"sailors"were"starving"to"death."A"cabin"boy"was"near"death"so"the"
crew"killed"&"ate"him,"they"were"rescued"&"prosecuted"&"raised"necessity."Were"they"obliged"to"
endure"this,"is"killing"in"certain"circumstances"ok?"Held"it"was"not"necessary"&"refused"to"accept"
killing"of"an"innocent"justified"saving"one’s"own"life."" " " " " """"""""""
Principle:(Old"view"was"killing"someone"to"save"one’s"own"life"was"not"justified."

Case:"S"v"Goliath"1972"""" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Necessity."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(Z"&"Y"were"walking"together"&"came"upon"X,"Y"asked"X"for"money"&"cigarettes"to"which"X"
refused."Y"then"stabbed"X"&"ordered"Z"to"tie"X"up,"Z"initially"refused"but"Y"threatened"to"kill"him"so"
he"submitted"&"did"so"while"Y"was"still"stabbing"X."Charged"with"murder,"court"recognised"
compulsion"could"justify"killing"of"an"innocent."Majority"held"the"law"doesn’t"uphold"the"highest"
possible"standards,"normal"humans"choose"their"own"lives"over"another’s"&"G.O.J"are"an"objective"
test"based"on"a"reasonable"person,"&"so"a"reasonable"person"would"also"kill"due"to"compulsion."
Minority"held"that"justification"&"excuse"are"2"separate"things,"an"excuse"is"where"we"accept"
conduct"was"unlawful"but"we"pardon"it"due"to"the"circumstances."Justification"actually"makes"the"
conduct"lawful"which"would"mean"private"defence"couldn’t"be"used"meaning"a"person"would"be"
obliged"to"endure"an"attack." " " " " " " " """"""""""""""
Principle:(A"person"may"kill"an"innocent"party"due"to"compulsion.""

3. Consent(
• Generally"harm"is"not"done"to"one"who"consents"(volenti&non&fit&injuria)"i.e."there"is"no"crime."
Certain"forms"of"consent"are"recognised."
1) Living"Will:"While"a"person"is"alive"they"may"sign"a"document"that"states"that"if"you"are"in"a"
vegetative"state"with"NO"PROSPECT"of"recovering"you"will"not"be"kept"alive"unnaturally"(not"
euthanasia"as"you"are"simply"letting"nature"take"its"course)."

Case:"Clark"v"Hurst"NO"1992"""" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Living"Will."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(C"applied"to"discontinue"artificial"nutrition"to"her"husband"who"was"in"a"persistent,"
irreversible"vegetative"state."Note"this"is"different"to"a"respirator"as"he"was"still"alive"not"brain"dead."
Held"there"is"no"closed"list"of"G.O.J"&"to"serve"&"justify"unlawful"conduct"new"areas"may"be"made."
Boni&mores"(Legal"convictions"of"society)"determines"what"the"law"should"sanction,"it"is"an"enquiry"
based"on"a"balance"of"interests."The"court"looked"at"the"quality"of"life"for"the"patient"v"society’s"
sense"of"propriety."Held"no"prospect"existed"for"living"a"normal"life,"brain"function"was"so"low"it"
barely"qualified"as"life,"C"succeeds." " " " " " " """"""""""""""
Principle:(Courts"will"look"at"the"quality"of"life"v"society’s"sense"of"propriety."

• Courts"will"allow"euthanasia"only"where"there"is"no"positive"conduct"(Hartman)"but"nature"takes"
its"course.""

36"
"
 2) Refusal"of"medical"treatment:"Even"if"it"may"hasten"death"(Blaue)."High"court"as"upper"guardian"
of"children"can"be"approached"in"children"related"matters."
3) Consent"to"sport"involving"assault:"Only"lawful"sport"can"be"excused."Consent"extends"only"to"
what"is"reasonably"expected"in"that"sport,"anything"that"exceeds"this"will"not"be"consented"to."
You"may"consent"to"legal"medical"treatment"assault"(Stoffberg"v"Elliot)."

Case:"R"v"Njikelona"1925"""" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Consent"to"assault."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(N"was"a"sangoma"who"rubbed"what"he"thought"was"an"aphrodisiac"on"a"woman’s"genitals,"
this"caused"pain"&"discomfort/rash."N"was"charged"with"sexual"assault"&"claimed"consent."Held"it"is"
possible"to"consent"to"minor"physical"aggressions,"including"religious/customary/superstitious"
purposes"(what"constitutes"consent?)." " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:""It"is"possible"to"consent"to"minor"physical"aggressions."

Case:"S"v"Sikunyana"1961"""" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Consent"to"assault."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(S"was"a"priest"who"in"an"exorcism"used"hot"coals"to"drive"away"a"spirit"leaving"3rd"degree"
burns."Charge"of"assault"with"intent"to"cause"grievous"bodily"harm,"held"assault/bodily"aggression"of"
a"serious"nature"cannot"be"consented"to." " " " " " """""""""""""
Principle:(Assault"of"a"serious"nature"cannot"be"consented"to."

• Sexual"aggression"(indecent"assault)."

Case:"R"v"Brown"1923"(English"case)" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Sexual"aggression."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(2"men"agreed"to"beat"with"hands,"sting"with"nettles,"whip"with"belt,"nailing"of"foreskin"&"
scrotum"to"a"board,"insertion"of"hot"wax"into"urethra"&"burning"of"genitals"with"a"candle"for"
pleasure."Evidence"was"a"password"was"used"(to"stop)"&"equipment"was"clean"&"no"permanent"
injuries"existed."3rd"party"raised"indecent"assault."On"the"one"hand"the"law"is"not"involved"in"
people’s"private"lives,"on"the"other"it"must"prevent"harmful"conduct."Held"this"practice"is"dangerous"
&"has"ramifications"for"society"in"general"(moralistic"approach)."Sadomasochism"is"the"indulgence"of"
cruelty"&"even"though"these"people"were"controlled"others"may"not"be,"decease"could"be"spread,"&"
there"is"no"evidence"to"suggest"sadomasochism"supports"happiness"in"general."Held"guilty.""""""""""""""""
Principle:(We"must"look"at"the"autonomy"of"the"individual"v"potential"harm"to"society.""

• In"Brown"the"minority"held"the"state"should"not"interfere"with"peoples"personal"lives"&"should"
not"engage"in"questions"of"private"morality."Is"there"harm"to"society?""

Case:"S"v"Peverett""1940" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Consent"to"being"killed."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:"A"&"B"enter"into"a"suicide"pact,"they"were"to"sit"in"a"car"&"gas"themselves."They"were"both"
rescued"&"A"was"charged"with"attempted"murder."Held"the"law"doesn’t"recognise"consent"to"being"
killed"or"assisted"suicide"as"it"is"difficult"to"establish"capacity"to"consent"&"this"consent"could"be"
tainted"with"fraud." " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""
Principle:(The(law"doesn’t"recognise"consent"to"being"killed"or"assisted"suicide."

• Consent"in"the"workplace."
• 1st"question:"Is"there"consent?"

Case:"S"v"Collett"1978" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Consent"in"the"workplace."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(3"men"worked"for"a"farmer"(C),"they"captured"an"impala."C"gave"them"the"option"to"
chastisement"or"they"could"face"the"law"(it"was"illegal)."Charged"with"assault,"held"the"law"cannot"

37"
"
 recognise"this"consent"due"to"unequal"bargaining"powers,"the"state"has"an"obligation"to"society"&"
cannot"sanction"this." " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Unequal"bargaining"power"may"lead"to"a"lack"of"consent.""

Case:"S"v"McCoy"1953" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"Consent"in"the"workplace."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"young"airdhostess"was"whipped"by"her"employer"for"failing"to"wear"a"seatbelt"in"flight,"this"
was"a"term"in"her"contract."Charged"with"assault,"held"the"law"cannot"recognise"this"consent"due"to"
unequal"bargaining"powers,"if"this"is"allowed"then"why"not"sexual"favours." """"""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Unequal"bargaining"power"may"lead"to"a"lack"of"consent.""

• 2nd"question:"Is"the"consent"real?"
• Victims"consent"must"be"given"voluntarily/without"coercion,"they"must"be"aware"of"all"material"
facts."Often"with"no"real"consent"i.e."fraud,"2"forms"of"mistake"exist"error&in&negotio"(mistake"as"
to"nature"of"conduct"they"consent"to),"error&in&persona&(mistake"in"identity"of"person).""
• "error&in&negotio:"

Case:"S"v"Williams"1923""""" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:"error&in&negotio."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(W"was"to"perform"an"operation"to"improve"a"woman’s"vocal"cords,"while"she"is"under"W"
rapes"her."Here"is"obviously"a"mistake"in"the"nature"of"conduct,"mistake"as"to"the"consequence"or"
motive"is"irrelevant"(conduct"will"still"be"valid).""" " " " " """""""""""
Principle:(Mistake"as"to"the"consequence"or"motive"is"irrelevant."

• Submission"is"no"longer"a"justification"to"amount"to"consent"i.e."there"doesn’t"have"to"be"
evidence"of"a"struggle"(but"it"does"help"to"prove"it).""
• Fraud"extends"to"both"active"misrepresentation"&"nonddisclosure.""
• In"most"cases"if"the"accused"believed"there"was"consent"but"a"reasonable"person"wouldn’t,"if"
the"crime"allows"the"sentence"may"be"lessened."
• 3rd"question:"Was"the"person"able"to"validly"accept?"
• I.e."able"to"understand"actions"&"material"terms,"appreciate"consequences."They"can’t"be"
young/drunk/mentally"ill/unconscious/depressed"ect.""

Degrees(of(Participation(in(a(Crime(

• Looks"at"who"committed"the"crime,"it"serves"to"find"the"kind"of"liability"of"the"accused."Varying"
degrees"may"have"different"sentences"&"consequences"e.g."murder"v"accessory"to"murder."It"is"
possible"a"lesser"crime""gets"a"higher"sentence."""

"
Degree"of"
" Participatio
( n"
Involved" Involved"
" Before" After"
Completion" Completion"
" Perpetrators" Accessories"
" or"Principles" or"
Accomplices"
"
Personal" Imputatio
" n"

• Agency"principle:"He"who"commits"an"act"through"another"commits"the"act"himself"e.g."hitman."

38"
"
 • People"involved"after"the"crime"are"accessories"after"the"fact.""
• Principles"fulfil"all"the"elements"of"the"crime"while"accessories"facilitate/assist"in"completion"of"
the"crime."This"will"change"depending"on"the"facts"e.g."A"gives"B"an"iron"bar"knowing"that"B"
intends"to"steal"from"a"shop,"B"is"a"principle"for"theft"A"is"an"accessory."E.g.2."A"knowingly"gives"
B"an"iron"bar"to"kill"C,"both"B"&"A"are"principles."
• Personal"means"that"the"accused"fulfils"all"the"elements"of"the"crime."Imputation"means"they"
don’t"fulfil"these"requirements"but"conduct"&"causation"are"imputed"by"common"purpose"or"
agency."
• Common(purpose:(is"divided"into"prior"conduct"(prior"to"unlawful"act"you"agree"to"it"&"its"
consequences,"even"if"your"role"is"small"you"can"be"liable)"&"active"association"(allows"the"court"
to"impute"causation"&"conduct"to"members"of"a"group"if"1"person"in"the"group"is"guilty).""

Case:"S"v"Williams"1980""""" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Principles"v"Accomplices."""""""""(( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"willed"C"by"hitting"him"over"the"head"with"a"bottle,"B"helped"by"holding"C"down."Held"A"was"
the"principle"&"B"was"an"accomplice"(wrong)"as"he"satisfied"the"requirements"of"active"association."
Principle:(Always"check"for"principle"liability"FIRST,"and"then"move"on"to"other"liability.""

• i.e."either"personal,"as"an"agent"of"the"crime"of"through"common"purpose."
• Accessories(further"the"commission"of"a"crime"i.e."advise/assist/encourage/make"possible."This"
must"be"done"knowingly"(dolus&eventualis)"&"cannot"exist"without"perpetrator"liability,"i.e"you"
must"first"prove"a"crime"occurred."((
• Accomplices:"(1)"Must"perform"some"unlawful"conduct"(no"G.O.J."&"not"forced)."(2)"There"must"
be"a"causal"link"between"their"conduct"&"that"of"the"principle"(even"knowledge)."(3)"Must"
further"the"commission"of"a"crime"(positive"or"negative)."Some"omissions"never"amount"to"this"
e.g."failure"to"report"a"crime/knowledge"of"a"crime"or"being"a"passive"spectator."(4)"
Intention/knowledge"must"be"to"further"the"crime"(dolus&eventualis),"this"cannot"be"negligent"
the"assistance"must"be"willingly"given,"no"requirement"the"accomplice"knows"the"principle.(
• Common(Purpose:"This"is"where"2"or"more"people"agree"to"commit"a"crime/act"in"a"joint"
enterprise,"each"will"be"responsible"for"the"specific"conduct"of"either"of"them"(provided"the"
conduct"falls"within"their"common"design).(
• 3(Requirments:"(1)(Agreement/Active"association,"(2)(Common"design,"(3)(Commission"of"a"
crime."If"all"3"are"met"a"person"is"a"perpetrator"by"imputation,"the"only"exception"is"that"each"
individual"mens&rea&must"exist"individually,"to"do"this"we"use"objective"factors"to"make"
subjective"inferences"(Sigwala)(Mini).(
(1) Mandate/Prior(Agreement:"Common"purpose"only"applies"within"the"agreed"purpose"of"the"
crime,"this"is"determine"by"dolus&eventualis."i.e."if"the"criminal"could"foresee"the"real"possibility"
of"the"unexpected"crime,"it"doesn’t"matter"if"they"stated"it"won’t"happen."(
• Even"a"minor"role"suffices,"presence"at"the"scene"is"not"required,"imputation"can"only"occur"if"
the"personal"perpetrators"act"falls"within"the"foreseeable"mandate"(express/implied/tacit).(

Case:"R"v"Du"Randt"1954" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Common"purpose"agreement."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"&"B"set"out"to"rob"a"bank,"A"had"a"knife"&"assured"B"it"was"simply"for"intimidation."On"the"
scene"X"tried"to"attack"A,"a"struggle"ensued"&"B"rushed"to"assist"A,"during"the"struggle"X"was"
stabbed"by"A."On"the"facts"it"seemed"B"believed"the"knife"was"only"for"intimidation."However"when"
he"went"to"help"A"in"the"scuffle"his"conduct"showed"the"mandate"was"extended"(implied)."B"is"liable"
under"common"purpose."" " " " " " " " """"""""""""""
Principle:(Conduct"can"extend"a"mandate."

• It"is"not"possible"for"an"accused"to"dissociate"from"the"common"purpose"on"the"basis"that"the"
mandate"was"limited"(basis"of"dolus&eventualis).""

39"
"
 (2) Active(Association:(
• Normally"involves"a"crowd/mob,"the"only"requirement"is"a"common"objective"(no"prior"
agreement).(

Case:"R"v"Dladla"1962" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Active"association."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(D"was"armed"with"2"sticks"at"the"front"of"a"mob"which"had"attacked"&"killed"a"policeman,"
they"started"to"pursue"a"second"officer"who"they"then"killed"however"this"time"D"was"as"the"back"of"
the"mob."Could"D’s"conduct"be"imputed"to"the"2nd"officer?"Held"it"couldn’t"be"said"D"assaulted"the"
officer"&"he"could"only"be"liable"by"imputation"of"the"ones"who"did"kill"him."There"was"no"mandate"
that"could"be"found"&"D"was"acquitted."" " " " " " """"""""""
Principle:(In"the"past"there"were"no"set"rules"for"active"association."

Case:"R"v"Lugadesi"1989" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Active"association."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(Set"out"the"requirements"for"active"association,"(1)"A"must"be"present"at"the"crime,((2)"A"
must"be"aware"of"the"crime"happening,((3)"A"must"have"intended"to"make"common"cause"with"the"
people"perpetrating"the"crime,((4)"A"must"have"manifested"his"intention/sharing"of"cause"by"himself"
performing"some"kind"of"act"of"association,((5)(A"must"have"the"required"mens&rea."Objective"
factors"must"be"looked"at"to"make"subjective"inferences." " " " """""""""""
Principle:(5"requirements"for"active"association.""

Case:"S"v"Safatsa"1988" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Active"association."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(Service"levies"were"increased"&"a"crowd"gathered"outside"the"major’s"house"which"the"police"
dispersed"but"it"later"redgathered."A"person"in"the"crowd"suggested"burning"the"house"down"&"the"
people"made"petrol"bombs,"the"major"seeing"this"shot"at"the"crowd,"a"woman"in"the"crowd"then"
shouted"‘let’s"kill"him’""&"they"began"throwing"petrol"bombs"&"stones."Major’s"wife"escaped"but"the"
major"burnt"alive."8"people"were"charged"with"murder"&"convicted,"6"appealed."A1:"Struck"the"
major"with"a"rock"&"wrestled"him"for"his"gun."A2:"was"affected"by"teardgas"&"returned"much"later,"
he"also"hit"the"major"in"the"back"with"a"stone."A3:"was"in"possession"of"the"major’s"gun."A4:"slapped"
a"man"who"was"against"killing"the"major."A5:"threw"petrol"bombs"&"lit"the"kitchen"door."A6:"
instructed"people"on"how"to"use"petrol"bombs."They"all"argued"they"only"played"a"small"role"&"
cannot"be"liable,"held"that"through"common"purpose"they"were"all"liable." " """"""""
Principle:(Application"of"common"purpose."

Case:"S"v"Mgedezi"1989""""" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Active"association."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(There"was"an"attack"on"a"mining"compound"on"the"basis"that"certain"minors"were"
conformists."Charged"with"murder"through"common"purpose,"on"appeal"they"contested"that"none"
of"them"had"contributed"greatly."Held"evidence"against"each"separate"A"must"be"looked"at,"people"
can’t"be"seen"as"a"single"entity."5"elements"looked"at"in"respect"of"each"A." " """"""""
Principle:(Because"2"or"more"people"share"a"goal"isn’t"sufficient,"there"must"be"positive"conduct"&"
conscious"codoperation."""

• Fault"in"common"purpose"must"be"addressed"individually."But"when"must"fault"be"assessed?"
Can"one"disassociate"from"the"common"purpose?"

Case:"S"v"Nkweja"1985" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Active"association."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(2"A’s"conspired"to"steal"a"car,"the"owner"or"the"car"&"1"A"were"both"shot"&"died."N"was"
convicted"of"culpable"homicide,"on"appeal"AD"looked"if"murder"was"more"appropriate"(i.e."intention"
is"the"issue)"but"it"couldn’t"be"proven"b.r.d"that"N"foresaw"the"real"possibility"as"A"didn’t"set"out"

40"
"
 with"a"gun,"it"was"simply"a"result"of"the"struggle."Next"the"court"looked"at"if"intention"should"be"
assessed"at"the"time"of"planning"or"time"of"the"act."Held"it"must"be"when"the"common"purpose"
arose"(i.e."a"person"who"plans"to"do"something"cannot"change"their"mind"later),"culpable"homicide"
confirmed."Minority"held"the"critical"time"for"assessing"is"during"perpetration"of"the"act.""""""""""""
Principle:(Intention"should"be"assessed"when"the"common"purpose"arose."

• When"can"someone"disassociate"from"the"common"purpose?"For"active"association"this"is"easy"
as"presence"is"needed,"therefore"just"stay"away."

Case:"S"v"Singo"1993" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Disassociation"from"common"purpose."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(S"had"been"part"of"an"attack"on"X,"in"the"confusion"S"was"hit"over"the"head"by"a"stick"&"left"to"
go"lie"down,"in"the"interim"the"crowd"killed"X."Held"that"S’s"actions"were"sufficient"to"withdraw"from"
the"common"purpose."Held"a"positive"act"of"association"to"attain"the"common"purpose"is"required."
Principle:(The"act"that"constitutes"a"withdrawal"must"clearly/unambiguously"show"the"intention"to"
withdraw."

• This"means"not"showing"up"is"not"sufficient"as"presence"is"not"a"requirement,"there"must"be"
positive"conduct"in"some"form"e.g."going"to"the"police.""

Case:"S"v"Nzo"1990" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Disassociation"from"common"purpose."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Principle:(Court"confirmed"that"exposing"details"&"a"plan"to"the"police"amounts"to"a"withdrawal"
from"the"common"purpose.""

• The"withdrawal"must"be"voluntary"it"cannot"be"as"a"result"of"the"police"or"someone"finding"out,"
some"kind"of"act"must"happen"to"try"stop"the"common"purpose."Withdrawal"is"only"effective"
before"the"“commencement"of"execution”"which"depends"on"the"crime"&"circumstances"of"
each"case.""
• Withdrawal(from(Common(purpose:(a"positive"act"is"needed"(try"to"stop),"but"the"time"when"
withdrawal"is"assessed"is"an"issue."(

Case:"R"v"Sharpe"1903" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Withdrawal"from"common"purpose."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(S"was"going"around"with"a"loaded"gun"threatening"to"kill"X,"X"was"then"killed"by"another"
person"known"to"S."Is"S"liable"under"common"purpose?"Held"S’s"acts"were"mere"preparations"which"
were"not"yet"complete,"he"hadn’t"done"enough"to"show"he"intended"to"complete"the"act"&"had"no"
role"in"the"murder." " " " " " " " " """""""""""""""
Principle:(Contemporanety"principle"means"point"of"commission"of"the"act"should"be"looked"at.""

• In"order"to"disassociate"from"the"common"purpose"A"must"notify"their"codconspirators"they"will"
not"take"part."However"if"your"participation"is"already"substantial"then"something"more"is"
needed"i.e."positive"conduct"(S"v"Beahan"1992)."
• Joiner(in(liability:(is"where"A,"who"intends"to"kill,"joins"an"attack"which"has"commenced"after"
the"mortal"blow"has"been"struck"(they"hasten"death)."According"to"this"the"Mgadezi"
requirements"are"fulfilled"&"conduct"cannot"be"imputed"after"the"fact,"they"are"a"second"entity."
These"people"are"liable"for"attempted"murder"(as"attempts"to"commit"the"impossible"are"
recognised),"unless"they"join"before"the"mortal"blow"(active"association)"&"if"they"hasten"death"
they"will"be"a"personal"perpetrator."

Case:"S"v"Motaung"1990" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Joiner"in"liability."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(M"joined"after"a"mortal"blow"but"before"death."On"the"one"hand"M"should"be"liable"as"

41"
"
 murder"arises"only"when"one"dies,"on"the"other"M"can’t"be"liable"as"he"didn’t"cause"death"(NCI)."
Held"M"was"liable"for"attempted"murder"but"this"doesn’t"mean"a"smaller"sentence"has"to"be"given."
Principle:(Application"of"joiner"in"liability."

Case:"S"v"Thebus"2003" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Disassociation"from"common"purpose."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(The"doctrine"of"common"purpose"was"upheld"as"constitutional,"the"main"challenge"was"that"
the"court"didn’t"have"to"prove"causation,"but"this"principle"aims"to"punish"for"a"joint"enterprise."The"
court"accepted"it"does"infringe"on"some"rights"however"it"has"a"legitimate"purpose." """"""""""""
Principle:(One"can"only"be"liable"if"they"have"individual"fault"(mens&rea)."

Attempts(

• An"attempt"to"commit"a"crime"is"a"crime"in"itself."This"aims"to"find"a"criterion,"i.e."to"evaluate"at"
what"stage"of"the"act"sufficed"as"an"attempt,"at"what"stage"is"the"act"attempted.""
• Note:"A"completed"attempt"is"one"where"A"has"done"all"they"set"out"to"do"but"by"some"external"
agency"(nature/skill/another)"they"fail."An"incomplete"attempt"is"where"A"didn’t"do"all"they"set"
out"2"i.e."they"were"stopped"by"something"(link"to"disassociation)."There"is"an"argument"that"an"
attempt"is"an"attempt"&"there"shouldn’t"be"a"differentiation.""

Case:"R"v"Schoombie"1945" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Attempts."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(Set"out"2"tests"for"attempt"liability"(incomplete"attempts)"to"establish"how"far"A’s"conduct"
must"go,"i.e."1)"what"suffices"as"an"attempt?"2)"How"much"of"the"plan"must"be"in"effect?"3)"
Proximity"to"end?"Test"1:"commencement"of"consummation"test"i.e."when"A"is"interrupted"is"it"the"
beginning"of"the"end,"have"their"actions"gone"far"enough"(preparatory"steps"are"not"sufficient)."(i)"
the"A"must"intend"to"complete"the"crime,"(ii)"A"must"carry"conduct"to"a"stage"where"there"is"little"
left"to"do,"(iii)"A"must"be"beyond"mere"preparation,"(iv)"A"must"start"the"last"series"of"events"which"
leave"little"scope"for"a"mind"change."Test"2:"equvicality"test"i.e."focus"on"the"mind"subjectively."
Mentally"has"A"reached"a"point"of"no"return"(based"on"objective"factors)." " """""""""""
Principle:(2"tests"for"attempts."

Case:"S"v"Nango"1990" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Attempts."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"was"apprehended"above"an"injured"policeman"with"an"axe"held"high."Using"the"Schoombie"
tests"A"was"liable"for"attempted"murder."" " " " " " """"""""
Principle:(Application"of"2"tests."

Case:"R"v"Hlatwayo"1933" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Attempts."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(H,"a"domestic"worker,"puts"poison"in"her"employers’"porridge"but"is"seen"by"the"gardener"
who"threatens"to"tell"so"she"removes"the"pot"&"dumps"the"food"down"the"drain."Held"H"did"all"she"
set"out"to"do"&"is"liable"for"attempted"murder." " " " " " """"""""
Principle:(Application"of"2"tests."

• Does"the"law"allow"for"a"change"of"mind?"Hlatwayo"held"that"only"a"voluntary"change"of"mind"
before"the"beginning"of"the"end"will"suffice"as"a"change,"after"this"point"will"not."Snyman"argues"
that"any"change"of"mind"is"sufficient"as"the"aims"of"deterrence"&"prevention"have"already"
happened"&"therefore"the"mens&rea&&"actus&reus"don’t"coincide.""
• Can"one"attempt"to"commit"an"impossible"act?"

Case:"S"v"Davies"1956" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Attempts."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

42"
"
 Facts:(Abortion"was"illegal"&"D"has"personally"aborted"her"child,"however"evidence"showed"the"child"
was"already"dead."Held"D"was"liable"for"attempted"murder."" " " " """"""""""
Principle:(It"is"possible"to"try"attempting"to"commit"the"impossible,"as"the"law"tries"to"prevent"
crimes"from"happening"&"one"cannot"be"absolved"due"to"some"luck.""

• This"above"rule"is"subject"to"the"fact"that"if"A"is"attempting"to"commit"an"aim"that"isn’t"a"crime"
they"can’t"be"liable."Note"the"Davies"rule"means"if"A"shoots"a"scarecrow"thinking"it"is"a"human"&"
intends"to"kill"they"are"liable.""

Rape(

• Originally"rape"was"the"‘unlawful,"intentional"sexual"intercourse"with"a"woman"without"consent’"
i.e."men"weren’t"included"and"this"only"extended"to"vaginal"entry.""
• (1)"Unlawfulness:"presumed"unless"a"G.O.J"existed"(most"common"was"consent)."It"wasn’t"
possible"for"a"man"to"rape"their"wife"(changed"with"the"prevention"of"family"violence"act),"&"a"
boy"under"14"was"presumed"incapable"to"have"sex"&"therefore"couldn’t"rape"(changed"with"
criminal"evidence"&"procedure"act).""
• (2)"Sexual"intercourse"with"a"woman:"only"extended"to"a"penis"into"a"vagina,"however"even"
slight"penetration"was"sufficient"(hard"to"prove)."Woman"couldn’t"rape"&"men"couldn’t"be"
raped."

"Case:"R"v"Handcock"1925" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Rape."""""""""(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(H"had"started"having"intercourse"with"Y"when"Y"heard"her"employer"coming"&"so"Y"withdrew"
her"consent."Held"H"is"not"liable"as"Y"had"consented"to"the"intercourse"but"not"2"being"found"out."
Principle:(Old"approach"was"very"sexist."

• What"is"a"woman"withdrew"consent"for"another"reason?"The"element"of"the"crime"could"only"
extend"to"the"accused"conduct"i.e."there"was"no"guilt"in"hiring"someone"to"rape"(no"common"
purpose).""
• If"due"to"the"force"used"a"woman"died"the"accused"would"only"be"liable"for"attempted"rape.""
• (3)"Without"consent:"Any"physical"resistance"would"suffice"as"a"lack"of"consent,"this"also"
extended"to"where"a"woman"would"submit."The"threat"didn’t"have"to"be"extreme.""

Case:"R"v"Swiggelaar"1950" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Rape."""""""""(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(S,"a"policeman,"went"to"X’s"house"and"told"her"she"had"to"go"with"him"to"the"police"station,"
she"did"but"on"the"way"he"pushed"against"a"wall"&"says"he"is"going"to"have"sex"with"her,"she"
protests"but"doesn’t"fight."Held"guilty"for"rape,"his"conduct"had"reduced"her"to"great"fear,"he"
superior"power"(strength,"position"&"having"a"gun)"would"have"induced"consent"(submission).""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Not"only"threats"of"violence"amount"to"duress."

Case:"S"v"Volschenk"1968" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Rape."""""""""(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(V,"a"policeman,"threatened"to"take"a"woman"to"jail"if"she"didn’t"have"sex"with"him."Held"
consent"was"induced"which"vitiated"her"consent."" " " " " """""""""""""""
Principle:(Not"only"threats"of"violence"amount"to"duress."

• There"are"certain"grounds"which"always"negate"consent,"(1)"Age"(being"too"young"to"consent),"
(2)"Mental"defect"(no"capacity),"(3)"Intoxication"(depends"on"degree"of"intoxication),"(4)"
Sleep/unconsciousness,"(5)"Fraud."
• Fraud"can"create"an"error&in&persona&(mistake"as"to"person),"for"example"where"X"induces"Y"to"
believe"they"are"their"husband"but"it"was"an"intruder"(R"v"C"1952),"where"the"state"of"identity"

43"
"
 lacks"consent,"things"like"wealth,"age,"willingness"to"pay"are"not"included."Or"an"error&in&
negotio(mistake"as"to"the"nature"of"the"conduct"entered"into),"for"example"R"v"Williams"1923"
above."&"
• There"cannot"be"a"negligent"rape,"dolus&is"needed"i.e."the"accused"must"foresee"the"real"
possibility"one"element"isn’t"met"(no"consent/underage)."
• The"definition"of"rape"has"now"been"changed."

Case:"S"v"Masiya"2006" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Rape."""""""""(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(M"anally"rape"a"young"girl,"this"wasn’t"technically"rape"but"indecent"assault."The"court"
showed"their"distaste"to"this"by"holding"M"liable"for"rape"anyway"as"the"definition"was"sexist"and"
infringed"on"many"constitutional"rights."This"judgement"is"technically"wrong"as"courts"cannot"make"
law,"however"this"resulted"in"the"drafting"of"the"sexual"offences"act." " " """"""""""""
Principle:(Creation"of"the"sexual"offences"act.""

• Sexual"offences"act"now"defines"rape"as"any"person"who"(1)"unlawfully"&"(2)"intentionally"
causes"an"act"of"(3)"sexual"penetration"with"another"(4)"without"consent"is"guilty"of"rape."
• (3)"Sexual"penetration"extends"to"any"act"which"causes"penetration"to"any"extent"by"(a)"genital"
organs"into"other"genital"organs,"including"the"anus"or"mouth,"(b)"any"other"part"of"the"body"of"
the"person/object"including"any"part"of"an"animal’s"into"genitals"or"anus,"(c)"genital"organs"of"an"
animal"into"the"mouth"of"a"person."Genital"organs"include"the"whole/part"of"a"person’s"organs"
including"surgically"constructed"or"reconstructed"organs.""
• Note"that"‘causes’"now"creates"a"wider"scope,"you"don’t"have"to"have"intercourse"but"may"be"
liable"if"you"allow"it"to"happen"e.g."codperpetrators"(principle"or"by"imputation"or"agency)."This"
means"a"person"who"instructs/pays"another"to"rape"will"be"a"personal"perpetrator,"this"also"
applies"to"common"purpose."""
• Note:"insertion"of"a"body"part"that"isn’t"a"genital,"human"or"animal,"into"the"mouth"of"another"
isn’t"rape.""
• S1(2)"The"consent"must"be"a"voluntary/uncoerced"agreement"i.e."real"consent"or"knowledge"of"
all"the"material"facts"of"the"act."
• S1(3)"Lists"instances"where"there"isn’t"a"voluntary/uncoerced"agreement."(1)"Where"the"victim"
submits"due"to"(a)"force/intimidation,"(b)"threat"of"harm."(2)Abuse"of"power"of"authority"which"
inhibits"the"victim."(3)"Where"the"act"is"committed"through"fraudulent"means"(error&in&
persona/error&in&negotio)."(4)"Where"the"victim"is"incapable"of"appreciating"the"nature"of"the"
act."
• (1)"Submissions"due"to"force/intimidation:"are"accepted"in"our"law"as"someone"may"submit"to"
prevent"further"harm."Proof"where"there"are"no"injuries"is"a"problem."This"threat"doesn’t"have"
to"be"directly"against"the"victim"e.g."threat"of"family.""
• S1(3)b:"the"use"of"power/authority:"(S"v"Volschenk)(R"v"Swiggelaar)."
• S1(3)c:"Consent"obtained"by"fraud:"(S"v"Williams)"The"act"allows"for"other"types"of"fraud"e.g."if"
there"is"a"condition"of"no"HIV"&"one"party"lies"about"this."Again"misrepresentations"about"
wealth/age"ect."do"not"count."
• (1)"Unlawfulness:"Official"capacity"is"a"GOJ"where"people"working"in"a"professional"way"cannot"
be"liable"e.g."doctor/gynaecologist."This"would"also"be"covered"by"consent."Dolus&eventualis&
suffices"i.e."foresee"the"real"possibility"that"X’s"real"consent"is"lacking/underage"&"act"recklessly"
to"this."
• The"act"sets"out"a"number"of"minimum"prescribed"sentences"(S51):"Minimum"of"life"if"(a)"the"
victim"was"raped"by"more"than"1"perpetrator,"(b)"the"victim"was"raped"by"more"than"1"
perpetrator"through"common"purpose,"(c)"the"accused"is"already"convicted"of"2"or"more"
accounts"of"rape,"(d)"the"accused"knows"they"have"HIV,"(e)"the"victim"is"below"the"age"of"16,"(f)"
the"victim"is"physically"disabled,"(g)"the"victim"is"mentally"ill,"(h)"the"rape"involves"grievous"

44"
"
 bodily"harm."Other"instances:"10"years"for"a"first"time"offender,"15"for"a"second"&"25"for"3rd"or"
more.""

Fraud(

• IS"the"(1)"unlawful"and"(2)"intentional"making"of"a"(3)"misrepresentation"which"causes"an"(4)"
actual/potential"prejudice"to"another."This"is"a"crime"of"a"trickster/liar,"the"crime"cannot"be"
negligent."Crucial"element"is"misrepresentation"followed"by"a"prejudice.""
(1) "Unlawfulness:"may"be"negated"by"a"GOJ"(coercion/compulsion/authority/superiority)."Would"
the"law"allow"consent"to"defraud?"
• Some"forms"of"misrepresentation"aren’t"unlawful"(puffing),"this"is"exaggerating"the"qualities"of"a"
thing"for"advertising"purposes."Misrepresentations"of"love/affection"are"also"not"illegal."
(2) Intention:"is"divided"into"(1)"an"intention"to"deceive"&"(2)"an"intention"by"the"deceit"to"induce"
another"to"act"to"their"detriment/prejudice."E.g."if"you"have"a"painting"you"claim"to"be"an"
original"painters"(but"you"know"it"isn’t)"there"is"only"intention"to"deceive"(not"criminal)."If"
however"you"do"this"to"induce"one"to"buy"the"painting"for"a"high"price"there"is"a"crime.""
• Dolus&eventualus"Is"needed"(no"negligent"fraud)"i.e."did"A"foresee"the"real"possibility"that"what"
he"is"saying"isn’t"true"&"the"person"may"be"prejudiced"due"to"this."We"figure"this"out"by"looking"
at"objective"factors"to"make"subjective"inferences"(S"v"Henkes)."

Case:"Re"London"and"Globe"Finance"Ltd"1903" """" " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Intention"to"defraud."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(Courts"held"to"deceive"is"to"induce"a"man"to"believe"something"is"true"which"is"actually"false,"
but"to"defraud"is"to"deprive"by"this"deceit.""

(3) "Misrepresentation:"this"is"the"conduct"requirement"which"is"created"through"an"incorrect"
statement"of"fact"or"law,"and"can"be"written/verbal/physical"(a"nod)."A"misrepresentation"can"
further"be"express"or"implied,"either"by"positive"conduct"or"by"omission"(nonddisclosure).""
• Misrepresentation"by"words:"must"encompass"a"false"statement"(question"of"fact),"often"
interpretation"is"used"to"determine"the"meaning"of"words.""

Case:"S"v"Wege"1968" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Misrepresentation"by"words."""""""""(( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"demodtractor,"with"about"400"miles"on"the"clock"was"sold"as"new."Court"looked"at"if"new"
meant"unused"or"in"the"ordinary"sense"of"the"word."Held"the"answer"depends"on"the"circumstances"
of"each"case."" " " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""
Principle:(Courts"will"interpret"words"depending"on"the"circumstances"of"each"case.""

• Misrepresentation"by"conduct:"for"instance"is"X"was"to"buy"something"on"credit,"they"represent"
that"they"are"(1)"able"and"(2)"willing"to"pay."Or"where"X"was"to"insert"a"beerdcan"ring"into"a"
parking"meter"(S"v"Myeza)."""""
• Misrepresentation"by"silence:"is"more"common."This"arises"if"there"was"a"legal"duty"to"disclose,"
for"instance"where"a"director"of"a"company"must"disclose"their"interest"in"a"transaction"(S"v"
Heller)."This"also"arises"where"X’s"words,"even"though"true,"are"likely"to"give"a"false"impression."
E.g:"

Case:"Marais"v"Edelman" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Misrepresentation"by"silence."""""""""((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:"A"seller"of"a"property"man"claimed"he"had"pumped"from"a"borehole"for"3"years"without"it"
failing,"he"neglected"to"mention"it"was"14"years"ago."" " " " " " """"""""""
Principle:(A"halfdtruth"gives"a"seller"a"legal"duty"to"disclose."

45"
"
 Case:"Dimmock"v"Hallett" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Misrepresentation"by"silence."""""""""((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"seller"of"a"rentable"flat"claimed"he"had"a"tenant"on"their"property,"but"they"knew"the"tenant"
had"been"given"notice"of"leave."."" " " " " " """"""""" " """"""""""""""
Principle:(A"halfdtruth"gives"a"seller"a"legal"duty"to"disclose."

• Misrepresentation"of"state"of"mind:"Ties"in"with"a"misrepresentation"by"conduct"(buying"on"
credit)."These"must"be"misrepresentations"of"an"existing"fact,"not"future"conduct.""

Case:"R"v"Persotam"1938" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Misrepresentation"by"state"of"mind."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(If"A"buys"on"credit"they"impliedly"represent"they"intend"to"pay"for"the"item"in"the"future"&"
they"commit"fraud"if"they"have"no"intention"to"pay"(knew"at"the"time"the"payment"wouldn’t"be"
honoured)."" " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(The"A"must"intend"to"fulfil"their"obligations.""

"Case:"R"v"Deetlefs"1953" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Misrepresentation"by"state"of"mind."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"purchased"&"received"a"truck"&"gave"the"seller"a"postddated"check,"A"said"they"had"no"
money"presently"however"money"went"in"&"out"&"on"the"postddate"he"could"go"acquire"the"money."
Money"only"went"out"of"the"account"however,"on"the"date"of"signing"the"check"A"didn’t"have"the"
remotest"possibility"of"paying"the"check,"guilty"for"fraud."" " " " " "
Principle:(The"A"must"intend"to"fulfil"their"obligations.""

• Misrepresentation"of"law:""

Case:"R"v"Persotam"1938" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Misrepresentation"of"law."""""""""(( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(S"went"around"to"butcher"shops"claiming"they"had"to"have"a"certain"sign"outside"their"
window"which"he"sold"to"them,"held"guilty"for"misrepresentation"of"law." " """"""""
Principle:(You"cannot"misrepresent"a"rule"of"law.""

(4) Actual/potential"prejudice:"The"A"need"not"actually"make"a"gain."This"means"that"(1)"potential"
prejudice"suffices"(actual"not"needed),"&"(2)"prejudice"doesn’t"have"to"be"proprietary.""
(4.1)""What"is"potential"prejudice:"the"ambit"of"the"crime"has"extended"so"far"it’s"almost"impossible"
to"have"an"attempted"fraud."
Case:"R"v"Kruse"1946" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Potential"prejudice."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:"N/A" " " " " " " " " " """""""""""""
Principle:(A"misrepresentation"will"be"potential"if"in"the"ordinary"course"of"event"it"is"likely"to"cause"
prejudice.""
Case:"R"v"Heyne"1956" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Potential"prejudice."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:"N/A" " " " " " " " " " """""""""""""
Principle:(Likely"(from"Kruse"case)"means"that"it"doesn’t"mean"the"prejudice"is"a"certainty,"it"is"
enough"if"there"is"a"risk"of"certainty"(not"too"remote)."
Case:"S"v"Ostilly"1977" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Potential"prejudice."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:"N/A" " " " " " " " " " """""""""""""
Principle:(Misrepresentation"is"potentially"prejudicial"where"there"is"a"real"likelihood"it"will"cause"
prejudice."

46"
"
 • Prejudice"may"be"looked"at"objectively,"i.e."the"ordinary"person"of"ordinary"knowledge,"it"
doesn’t"matter"if"the"victim"wouldn’t"have"believed"the"misrepresentation."Remember"the"test"
for"intention"is"still"subjective.""

Case:"R"v"Dyonta" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Potential"prejudice."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(D"attempted"to"sell"glass"as"diamonds,"but"X"knew"they"were"glass."In"the"ordinary"course"of"
events"D"could"have"deceived"the"ordinary"person"to"their"detriment,"held"guilty"of"fraud.""""""""""
Principle:(Potential"prejudice"is"an"objective"test.""

• If"X"was"to"buy"the"glass"in"the"above"case"there"would"still"be"fraud"but"there"would"be"actual"
prejudice.""
• Existence"of"prejudice"must"be"determined"at"the"time"when"the"misrepresentation"is"made"
along"with"the"intention"to"induce"(contempornaity)."E.g."A"sells"B"shares"in"an"oil"company"
claiming"they"have"just"struck"oil"when"they"had"not,"but"shortly"after"they"do."B"is"in"a"better"
position"depending"on"where"you"assess"the"time"of"misrepresentation."If"they"had"struck"oil"
before"the"misrepresentation"but"A"didn’t"know,"A"will"be"liable"for"attempted"fraud"
(impossibility"is"recognised).""

(4.2)"Nondpropriety"prejudice:"Only"need"to"inconvenience"the"other"party."

Case:"R"v"Heyne"1956" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Potential"prejudice."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(H"was"a"liquor"licence"holder"who"made"false"entries"in"his"books"to"conceal"illegal"liquor"
transactions."Charged"with"fraud,"he"argued"it"didn’t"prejudice"anyone."Held"guilty"as"the"potential"
prejudice"was"to"public"administration"as"a"whole,"to"stop"elicit"transactions."" """"""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Prejudice"doesn’t"have"to"be"to"the"actual"person"the"misrepresentation"was"made"to."

"Case:"R"v"Frankfort"Motors"1946" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Potential"prejudice."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(It"was"wardtime,"during"petrol"rationing"&"a"garage"owner"falsified"certain"documents"to"
acquire"more"petrol."Convicted"of"fraud,"there"was"potential"prejudice"in"that"this"could"undermine"
the"war"effort;"obstruct"the"state’s"emergency"regulations"&"prejudice"retailers"&"other"consumers."
Principle:(Potential"prejudice"&"actual"prejudice"can"overlap.""

Case:"R"v"Seabe"1927" "" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Potential"prejudice."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(S,"a"coloured"man,"wasn’t"entitled"to"purchase"liquor."S"went"to"a"shop"with"a"forged"note"
from"his"employer,"Mrs"Scott,"alleging"she"needed"meths."Convicted"of"fraud,"held"conduct"was"
potentially"prejudiced"to"the"shop"owner"as"he"was"liable"for"prosecution"under"the"liquor"act."
Principle:(Risk"of"civil"proceeding"or"prosecution"is"sufficient"for"prejudice."

Case:"R"v"Thabeta"1948" "" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Potential"prejudice."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(T"wrote"a"teachers"exam"under"Y’s"name."Held"both"T(actual)"&"Y(implied)"liable"for"fraud,"
prejudice"was"the"department"of"education,"quality"of"education"&"student"of"the"teacher.""
Principle:(Prejudice"can"extend"to"more"than"1"person,"codperpetrators"are"recognised.""

Case:"R"v"Deale"1960" "" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Potential"prejudice."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(D"induces"a"number"of"people"that"he"was"selling"a"medicine"from"Germany,"it"was"actually"a"
South"African"equivalent."The"medicine"was"the"same"so"was"there"prejudice?"Held"actual"prejudice"
existed,"but"for"the"misrepresentation"the"X’s"wouldn’t"have"purchased"the"medicine.""""""""""""""""""

47"
"
Principle:(If"A"was"to"induce"X"to"make"a"choice"they"would"otherwise"not"have"made,"there"is"
sufficient"potential"prejudice,"regardless"of"if"X"would"have"been"worse"off"or"not."

Case:"S"v"Tshoba"1989" "" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Potential"prejudice."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(T"produced"a"fake"passport"to"an"arresting"officer,"held"it"would"be"going"too"far"to"say"any"
potential"prejudice"existed"as"giving"false"information"to"a"policeman"is"already"a"crime."""""""""""""""
Principle:(There"is"a"qualification"that"the"prejudice"mustn’t"be"too"remote"or"fancy."

Assault(

• Is"the"(1)"Unlawful"and"(2)"intentional"act"of"either"(3)(a)"applying"force"to"another"or"(b)"
inspiring"the"belief"in"another"force"will"be"applied"to"them."
• The"slightest"contact"is"sufficient,"e.g."spitting"at"someone,"cutting"their"hair,"lifting"their"hat."
This"creates"a"very"wide"ambit"however"remember"the"law"doesn’t"concern"itself"with"trivialities.""
• (1)"Unlawfulness:"Can"be"negated"by"a"GOJ,"e.g"consent"(dancing,"sport);"authority"(policeman"in"
line"of"duty,"parental"authority);"private"defence"(self,"property).""
• (2)"Intention:"dolus&is"required,"there"cannot"be"a"negligent"assault,"i.e."did"A"foresee"the"real"
possibility"their"conduct"would"result"in"force"or"would"inspire"the"belief"force"will"be"applied.""
• (3)"Application"of"force:"(a)"Actual:"can"be"direct"(X"hits"Y)"or"indirect"(X"derails"a"train)."If"X"
administers"any"substance"against"Y’s"will"/"that"causes"internal"bodily"harm."

Case:"S"v"Marx"1962" "" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Assault."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(M"gave"3"glasses"of"wine"to"two"children"(aged"5"&"7),"they"became"ill,"he"younger"couldn’t"
walk"&"both"were"in"a"semidconscious"state."Held"guilty"for"assault."" " " """"""""""""""
Principle:(Administering"any"substance"against"Y’s"will"/"that"cause’s"internal"bodily"harm"is"assault."

Case:"S"v"A"1993" "" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Assault."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"person"forced"another"to"drink"urine." " " """""""""""""" " " " "
Principle:(Forced"drinking"of"ANY"substance"is"assault.""

• (b)"Inspiring"belief/anticipation"of"force:"This"means"a"person"believes"physical"aggression"is"
imminent."The"test"is"generally"object"to"protect"against"worrisome"people,"subjectively"X"
doesn’t"have"to"feel"fear."The"fear"must"be"real"fear,"&"must"be"immediate,"just"because"a"threat"
of"harm"is"condition"doesn’t"mean"it"isn’t"a"threat"of"harm."

Case:"R"v"Dhlamini"1931""" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Deals(with:(Assault."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(D"took"up"a"position"outside"X’s"door,"picked"up"stones"&"threatened"to"kill"X"if"he"came"out."X"
was"entitled"to"leave"his"home,"D"held"liable"for"assault."" " " " """""""""""""
Principle:(A"person"entitled"to"an"act"(i.e."to"leave"their"home)"may"be"a"victim"of"assault,"if"they"
aren’t"entitled"(e.g."attack"someone"with"a"knife)"they"won’t"be."

• X’s"belief"of"attack"may"be"awakened"by"acts/words/conduct."
• Attempted"assault"is"hard"to"find"as"the"crime"is"so"wide,"but"say"X"is"unaware"of"the"threat"
(sleeping"ect)"then"A"is"guilty"for"attempted"assault."
• It"is"possible"to"have"assault"with"intent"to"do"grievous"bodily"harm"which"is"established"through"
the"weapon"used"and"&"where"on"the"body"it"was"used."

"

48"
"