#
Case
Key Aspects
Ratio Decidendi
Court Ruling
S v Bochris
Investments
(Pty) Ltd 1988
(1) SA 861 (A)
Corporate negligence involving
a child’s drowning in a resort
pool due to a defective water
outlet. The company failed to
implement reasonable safety
measures to prevent
foreseeable harm.
Companies can be
held criminally liable
for negligence
through
acts/omissions of
directors/employees.
Company was held criminally liable.
The ruling emphasized that the
company had a duty to prevent
foreseeable harm and failed to do so.
The previous conviction was upheld
on appeal.
S v Coetzee 2003
(1) SACR 360
(W)
Robbery committed by an
accused with significantly
diminished intellectual
capacity. The accused struggled
to fully understand the nature
and consequences of his
conduct.
Diminished
intellectual ability
can mitigate criminal
capacity but does not
automatically negate
intent.
Conviction reduced due to lack of full
understanding. The court
acknowledged his limited capacity but
affirmed some understanding of
wrongdoing. The original conviction
was reduced due to diminished
capacity.
S v Eadie 2002
(1) SACR 663
(SCA)
The accused, in a road rage
incident, killed another driver
after being provoked. He
claimed he lost control due to
emotional stress.
1
2
3
S v Gaba 1985
(4) SA 734 (O)
4
S v Hombela
1933 TPD 318
5
A young boy claimed he
committed murder under the
influence of a tokoloshe. The
case raised questions about
belief-based explanations in
criminal responsibility.
A minor committed homicide,
claiming supernatural influence
by a tokoloshe. The case predated modern capacity tests
but posed early questions on
superstition in legal defences.
Emotional stress or
provocation ≠
automatism;
distinguished
between loss of
temper and loss of
control.
Belief in tokoloshe,
without medical or
psychological
incapacity, does not
negate criminal
responsibility.
Cultural beliefs alone
do not negate
criminal
responsibility.
Significance
Landmark case on
corporate criminal
liability, affirming
that juristic
persons can bear
criminal
responsibility for
negligent acts.
Recognised
intellectual
disability as a
mitigating factor,
influencing
sentencing and
culpability
assessments.
Convicted of murder. The judgment
clarified that a loss of temper does not
equate to legal incapacity. The murder
conviction was overturned and
replaced with culpable homicide.
Clarified that
emotional
provocation alone
does not amount to
criminal incapacity
or negate intent.
Found guilty. The belief in a tokoloshe
was not accepted as a defence without
evidence of mental illness. The
original conviction was upheld
despite cultural belief defence.
The case rejected
cultural belief
alone as a valid
excuse, upholding
legal standards
over superstition.
Convicted. The court dismissed
supernatural influence as a legally
valid defence. The conviction was
upheld; tokoloshe defence was
rejected.
Set early precedent
for rejecting
supernatural
explanations as
defences.
S v Humphreys
2013 (2) SACR 1
(SCA)
A taxi driver ignored safety
barriers and crossed a railway,
causing a train collision that
killed 10 children. The driver
had a duty to ensure the safety
of his passengers.
A grossly negligent
act can constitute
culpable homicide
when foreseeability
is clear.
S v Maritz 1996
(1) SACR 405 (O)
A police officer forced a suspect
to run in front of a moving
vehicle while tied with a rope.
This act was done as
punishment and humiliation.
Abuse of power by
state officials can
amount to criminal
assault/torture.
S v Ngema 1992
(2) SACR 651 (D)
The accused killed a toddler,
believing the child to be a
tokoloshe. He raised a mistakeof-fact defence based on this
delusion.
A mistake of fact
must be reasonable
to negate intent;
delusional belief ≠
reasonable mistake.
6
7
8
S v Stellmacher
1983 (2) SA 267
(T)
9
S v T.N.S.
(14658) [2014]
ZAWCHC 160
10
S v Van As 1976
(2) SA 921 (A)
11
The accused's mental condition
raised questions about his
criminal responsibility. The
court evaluated whether his
mental state met the statutory
criteria for incapacity.
A young accused was evaluated
to determine whether he had
the capacity to appreciate the
wrongfulness of his actions.
Age and psychological maturity
were key issues.
The accused slapped an obese
man during a quarrel, causing
him to fall, hit his head, and die.
The court assessed
foreseeability of such a fatal
consequence.
“Mental illness” must
meet criteria under
section 78 of the CPA
to excuse
responsibility.
Age and maturity are
critical in assessing
criminal capacity in
minors.
Intent to slap +
foreseeable fatal
outcome =
culpability for
resulting death.
Convicted of culpable homicide. The
driver’s gross negligence created a
foreseeable and avoidable danger to
the children. The original conviction
for murder was reduced to culpable
homicide.
Convicted. The court held that the
officer’s actions amounted to
deliberate abuse and criminal
misconduct. The original conviction
was upheld as intentional and
abusive.
Convicted; defence rejected. The court
ruled that his belief was irrational and
did not amount to a reasonable
mistake. The mistaken belief defence
was rejected; conviction upheld.
Found not criminally responsible. The
mental illness met the criteria under
the Criminal Procedure Act for lack of
capacity. The court confirmed the
diagnosis and upheld the incapacity
defence.
Youth may lack capacity depending on
evidence. The court carefully
considered psychological evaluations
in determining capacity. The youth's
conviction was upheld with
considerations of age and capacity.
Convicted of culpable homicide.
Although death was unintended, the
risk of serious harm was foreseeable
from the slap. Conviction was upheld
with the finding of recklessness and
foreseeability.
Reinforced legal
duty of care in
transport contexts,
particularly where
vulnerable lives are
at risk.
Served as a key
example of state
accountability in
custodial and
policing contexts.
Emphasised
distinction
between cultural
delusion and
genuine mistake of
fact.
Helped clarify the
scope of mental
illness and criminal
incapacity.
Applied and
developed the
principle of doli
incapax in juvenile
justice.
Demonstrated how
minor assaults can
lead to criminal
liability for
unintended
consequences.
A mother suffering from postnatal depression killed her
S v Wiid 1990 (1) infant. The court considered
SACR 561 (A)
her psychiatric condition as it
related to criminal
12
responsibility.
Mental disorder
impairing capacity
can excuse criminal
responsibility under
section 78.
The accused was convicted of
fraud involving large-scale
financial misconduct. The court
delivered a seminal judgment
on sentencing principles.
Established the
sentencing triad:
crime seriousness,
personal
circumstances, and
societal interest.
S v Zinn 1969 (2)
SA 537 (A)
13
Not guilty by reason of mental illness.
Her condition rendered her incapable
of distinguishing right from wrong at
the time. The conviction for murder
was replaced with a verdict of
diminished responsibility.
Sentence reduced on appeal. The
court applied the triad of sentencing
principles and found mitigating
factors. Sentencing decision was
upheld based on established triad
principles.
Leading authority
on post-natal
depression and
insanity defence.
Foundational case
on how South
African courts
balance factors in
sentencing.