PRL5902
Assignment 3 2026
Unique number:
Due date: 15 September 2026
QUESTION 1
(a) Criminal capacity of the four children
Freddy is fourteen, so the special presumption protecting children below fourteen no
longer applies, although he must still be dealt with under the Child Justice Act 75 of
2008.1 If the State proves trespassing, theft or malicious damage to property, he can
be criminally liable, subject to child justice procedures recognising his age.1
Jason is twelve and is presumed to lack criminal capacity because he is twelve but
still under fourteen.1 The State must prove beyond reasonable doubt that he could
understand the difference between right and wrong and act according to that
understanding when the conduct occurred.
, QUESTION 1
(a) Criminal capacity of the four children
Freddy is fourteen, so the special presumption protecting children below fourteen no
longer applies, although he must still be dealt with under the Child Justice Act 75 of
2008.1 If the State proves trespassing, theft or malicious damage to property, he can
be criminally liable, subject to child justice procedures recognising his age.2
Jason is twelve and is presumed to lack criminal capacity because he is twelve but
still under fourteen.3 The State must prove beyond reasonable doubt that he could
understand the difference between right and wrong and act according to that
understanding when the conduct occurred.
Kevin is also twelve, so the same rebuttable presumption protects him and his
participation in the planned adventure does not automatically establish criminal
capacity.4 His maturity, understanding and behaviour must be assessed before the
State can prove criminal responsibility.
Andy is six and cannot be held criminally liable because a child below twelve lacks
criminal capacity and cannot be prosecuted for an offence committed at that age. 5 In
my view, adult intervention may be necessary, but criminal prosecution is legally
excluded.
(b) Delictual liability for Mr Bean’s losses
Mr Bean can claim delictual damages only against a child who had delictual capacity
and whose conduct met the ordinary requirements of a delict, including
wrongfulness, fault, causation and proven loss.6 Delictual accountability does not
automatically follow the newer criminal age rules, because private law still applies its
1
Child Justice Act 75 of 2008 s 7; CR Snyman, Criminal Law (7th edn, LexisNexis 2020) 156–158.
2
Child Justice Act 75 of 2008; Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 s 28.
3
Child Justice Act 75 of 2008 s 7(2).
4
Child Justice Act 75 of 2008 s 11(1).
5
Child Justice Act 75 of 2008 s 7(1).
6
H Kruger, ‘The Discrepancy between the Criminal Capacity and Delictual Accountability of Children:
A Children’s Rights Perspective’ (2022) 85 THRHR 68.
Assignment 3 2026
Unique number:
Due date: 15 September 2026
QUESTION 1
(a) Criminal capacity of the four children
Freddy is fourteen, so the special presumption protecting children below fourteen no
longer applies, although he must still be dealt with under the Child Justice Act 75 of
2008.1 If the State proves trespassing, theft or malicious damage to property, he can
be criminally liable, subject to child justice procedures recognising his age.1
Jason is twelve and is presumed to lack criminal capacity because he is twelve but
still under fourteen.1 The State must prove beyond reasonable doubt that he could
understand the difference between right and wrong and act according to that
understanding when the conduct occurred.
, QUESTION 1
(a) Criminal capacity of the four children
Freddy is fourteen, so the special presumption protecting children below fourteen no
longer applies, although he must still be dealt with under the Child Justice Act 75 of
2008.1 If the State proves trespassing, theft or malicious damage to property, he can
be criminally liable, subject to child justice procedures recognising his age.2
Jason is twelve and is presumed to lack criminal capacity because he is twelve but
still under fourteen.3 The State must prove beyond reasonable doubt that he could
understand the difference between right and wrong and act according to that
understanding when the conduct occurred.
Kevin is also twelve, so the same rebuttable presumption protects him and his
participation in the planned adventure does not automatically establish criminal
capacity.4 His maturity, understanding and behaviour must be assessed before the
State can prove criminal responsibility.
Andy is six and cannot be held criminally liable because a child below twelve lacks
criminal capacity and cannot be prosecuted for an offence committed at that age. 5 In
my view, adult intervention may be necessary, but criminal prosecution is legally
excluded.
(b) Delictual liability for Mr Bean’s losses
Mr Bean can claim delictual damages only against a child who had delictual capacity
and whose conduct met the ordinary requirements of a delict, including
wrongfulness, fault, causation and proven loss.6 Delictual accountability does not
automatically follow the newer criminal age rules, because private law still applies its
1
Child Justice Act 75 of 2008 s 7; CR Snyman, Criminal Law (7th edn, LexisNexis 2020) 156–158.
2
Child Justice Act 75 of 2008; Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 s 28.
3
Child Justice Act 75 of 2008 s 7(2).
4
Child Justice Act 75 of 2008 s 11(1).
5
Child Justice Act 75 of 2008 s 7(1).
6
H Kruger, ‘The Discrepancy between the Criminal Capacity and Delictual Accountability of Children:
A Children’s Rights Perspective’ (2022) 85 THRHR 68.
