100 Matching questions
Criminal sanction 1-100by
A. assisted suicide of 100
providing crippled
wife with loaded
The defence of impossibility rifle. Mere fact that
last act causing
death was victim's
Materially defined crimes
own act did not
necessarily mean
Factors which exclude voluntariness of the act [ANA] person handing gun
to victim was not
guilty of any crime.
Individual deterrents
B. - Cannot direct
defensive act
The attacked person must be aware of the fact that he is against a third
acting in private defence person
C. X shoots Y in back. Y
THE ACT (Actus reus) would die in 30min.
Latecomer Z shoots
Y in head. Majority:
Omissions both acts cause of
Y's death. Shots
fired were fatal and
difference between necessity and private defence would in any case
lead to death.
Minority: head shot
Basic principle -
= novus actus
interveniens
Mshumpa:
D. - Conduct - act and
omission
- Thoughts not
Crimes
punishable - must
,Statutory Crimes- act must declare: have started
converting thoughts
into actions
Formally defined crimes - Act must be
human act/omission
- Act must be
3 factors courts must take into account when sentencing
voluntary - capable
of subjecting his
bodily movements
Conduct must be recognized by law as a crime ( Ius
to his will/intellect
Acceptum)- implied by section 35(3)(1)
E. -Punishment is an
General deterrence end in itself
- Just dessert
-Retrospective
Reformative theory -Equal proportion
between degree of
punishment and
Mokgethi: degree of harm
-Expression of
societies
Crimes should not be created with retrospective effect (
condemnation of
ius praevium )
crime
-Retribution
The principle of legality in punishment ( nulla poena sine explains culpability
lege ) - no penalty without a legal provision requirements
F. - Must not be
difference between necessity and private defence con formulated
vaguely/unclearly
- No express
Canestra: provision in
Constitution but sec
35(3) can be
Henry:
interpreted to cover
it as well
Fourie continue
,Examples of grounds of justification [PN-CP-ROO] G. 1.) Private defence
2.) Necessity 3.)
Consent 4.)
Combination theory Presumed consent
5.) Right of
chastisement 6.)
attack must be unlawful continue
Obedience to
orders 7.) Official
Dhlamini: capacity
H. where a person acts
in protection of his
Requirements for private defence: [UAT-ANRA]
own or another's
life, physical
Tembani: integrity, property
or other legally
recognised interest
henry continue which is
endangered by a
threat of harm
Attack must be directed against interests which, i n the which has already
eyes of the law, ought to be protected begun or is
immediately
Unlawfulness threatening and
which cannot be
averted in any other
Absolute force way.
I. 1. crime-degree of
Patel: harm/ seriousness of
violation
2. Criminal- personal
Requirements for private defence: continue circumstances of
offender
3. interest of society-
Provisions creating crimes must be interpreted strictly ( society must be
ius strictum ) deterred, righteous,
indignation of
, Insane automatism society must be
given expression.
THE DEFINITIONAL ELEMENTS J. bank teller wounded
in robbery -
paraplegic. Did not
Goliath: con follow doctor's
orders and dies from
septicaemia after 6
elements of criminal liability months.
K. Provisions in act
Requirements for defence of impossibility: [PON] creating a legal rule
which does not
simultaneously
Retribution
create a crime
L. -Knows of risk but
Crimes ought to be formulated clearly ( ius certum ) still proceeds to act
- Liable for crimes
requiring culpability
Fourie:
in the form of
negligence
Culpability - eg knows of
epileptic attacks but
still drives. Liable for
Leeuw: negligent driving
(Victor)
Defensive act must be necessary M. - Not be more
harmful than
necessary (Trainor)
Legal causation [IAN] continue - Factors in
determining
whether
Criminal norm: reasonable: -
Relative strength of
parties - Sex; ages
of parties - Means
Criminal sanction 1-100by
A. assisted suicide of 100
providing crippled
wife with loaded
The defence of impossibility rifle. Mere fact that
last act causing
death was victim's
Materially defined crimes
own act did not
necessarily mean
Factors which exclude voluntariness of the act [ANA] person handing gun
to victim was not
guilty of any crime.
Individual deterrents
B. - Cannot direct
defensive act
The attacked person must be aware of the fact that he is against a third
acting in private defence person
C. X shoots Y in back. Y
THE ACT (Actus reus) would die in 30min.
Latecomer Z shoots
Y in head. Majority:
Omissions both acts cause of
Y's death. Shots
fired were fatal and
difference between necessity and private defence would in any case
lead to death.
Minority: head shot
Basic principle -
= novus actus
interveniens
Mshumpa:
D. - Conduct - act and
omission
- Thoughts not
Crimes
punishable - must
,Statutory Crimes- act must declare: have started
converting thoughts
into actions
Formally defined crimes - Act must be
human act/omission
- Act must be
3 factors courts must take into account when sentencing
voluntary - capable
of subjecting his
bodily movements
Conduct must be recognized by law as a crime ( Ius
to his will/intellect
Acceptum)- implied by section 35(3)(1)
E. -Punishment is an
General deterrence end in itself
- Just dessert
-Retrospective
Reformative theory -Equal proportion
between degree of
punishment and
Mokgethi: degree of harm
-Expression of
societies
Crimes should not be created with retrospective effect (
condemnation of
ius praevium )
crime
-Retribution
The principle of legality in punishment ( nulla poena sine explains culpability
lege ) - no penalty without a legal provision requirements
F. - Must not be
difference between necessity and private defence con formulated
vaguely/unclearly
- No express
Canestra: provision in
Constitution but sec
35(3) can be
Henry:
interpreted to cover
it as well
Fourie continue
,Examples of grounds of justification [PN-CP-ROO] G. 1.) Private defence
2.) Necessity 3.)
Consent 4.)
Combination theory Presumed consent
5.) Right of
chastisement 6.)
attack must be unlawful continue
Obedience to
orders 7.) Official
Dhlamini: capacity
H. where a person acts
in protection of his
Requirements for private defence: [UAT-ANRA]
own or another's
life, physical
Tembani: integrity, property
or other legally
recognised interest
henry continue which is
endangered by a
threat of harm
Attack must be directed against interests which, i n the which has already
eyes of the law, ought to be protected begun or is
immediately
Unlawfulness threatening and
which cannot be
averted in any other
Absolute force way.
I. 1. crime-degree of
Patel: harm/ seriousness of
violation
2. Criminal- personal
Requirements for private defence: continue circumstances of
offender
3. interest of society-
Provisions creating crimes must be interpreted strictly ( society must be
ius strictum ) deterred, righteous,
indignation of
, Insane automatism society must be
given expression.
THE DEFINITIONAL ELEMENTS J. bank teller wounded
in robbery -
paraplegic. Did not
Goliath: con follow doctor's
orders and dies from
septicaemia after 6
elements of criminal liability months.
K. Provisions in act
Requirements for defence of impossibility: [PON] creating a legal rule
which does not
simultaneously
Retribution
create a crime
L. -Knows of risk but
Crimes ought to be formulated clearly ( ius certum ) still proceeds to act
- Liable for crimes
requiring culpability
Fourie:
in the form of
negligence
Culpability - eg knows of
epileptic attacks but
still drives. Liable for
Leeuw: negligent driving
(Victor)
Defensive act must be necessary M. - Not be more
harmful than
necessary (Trainor)
Legal causation [IAN] continue - Factors in
determining
whether
Criminal norm: reasonable: -
Relative strength of
parties - Sex; ages
of parties - Means
