CRW2601 Study Notes May/June 2015 Exam
Relevant Cases
Case Name Basic outline Relevance
S v Masiya 2007 (CC) Accused of rape 9yr. via Principal of legality
anus. Common-law did not ius praevium & ius strictum
see it as rape. Magistrate rules:
court found accused guilty act should be recognised as
of rape. He appealed. High a crime at the time of its
Court found in favour of commission (s 35(3)(1))
Magistrate court ruling. He &
appealed. CC found that courts should interpret the
the common-law definition defi nitions of crime strictly
needs to be extended to no express provision, but can
incl. it. Masiya was found be inferred from the general
not guilty of rape but guilty right to afair trial guaranteed
of indecent assault. in s 35(3)
Director of Public Accused of sexually assault Principal of legality
Prosecutions, Western Cape by touching breast and Nullum crimen sine lege &
v Prins 2012(SCA) private parts. He objected nulla poene rule:
saying that the Act does not
provide for a penalty for the No crime without law & no
offence created in s5(1). punishment without law
Wording in the Act is clear.
Magistrate court upheld the
decision. Director of Public
Prosecutions appealed to
High Court of Western
Cape. High Court concluded
that in the absence of a
penalty in the Act, the
charged failed to disclose an
offence. Appeal was
dismissed.
R v Dlamini 1955 The accused was half awake Requirement of an act
out of a nightmare and he Psychogenic automatism
stabbed the deceased 3 (Sane Automatism)
times. Price J held that the Momentarily acted like a
case had many unusual robot
features. The only eye
witness account differed
from that of the accused.
The accused was also good
friends with the deceased
father. There was no
1|Page
,CRW2601 Study Notes May/June 2015 Exam
motive for accused to kill
the deceased.
Accused was acting
mechanically – under the
influence of a nightmare –
not guilty of murder – no
proof of negligence – not
guilty of culpable homicide.
S v Henry 1999 Husband and wife are Requirement of an act
divorced. Have 3 daughters. Psychogenic automatism
Live with mother. Father – (Sane Automatism)
the appellant – has certain Momentarily acted like a
time he may see them. One robot
of the daughters spend the
weekend with the accused.
At the end of the weekend
daughter phone mother to
ask if she can stay with the
appellant till morning.
mother said no. the
appellant drove to his ex-
wife’s house with a firearm
in the car. Appellant and
wife quarrelled and wife
tried to push appellant
away. At this moment the
appellant became enraged –
according to evidence he
heard a zinging noise in his
ears and shouting going on
in his head. Appellant shot
his ex-wife and her mother
firing 3 times at both of
them killing them. Was
charged with inter alia – 2
counts of murder. His
defence held the sane
automatism. Court rejected
the defence and he was
charged. He appealed to
the SCA.
Scott JA held that if the
appellants actions was
involuntary must be
weighed up and considered
in light of the circumstances
specially against the
2|Page
, CRW2601 Study Notes May/June 2015 Exam
criminal conduct. The
testimony of the appalment
was that he had no
recollection of the event.
But as he returned to his car
he told his daughter that he
thought that he might have
shot Mrs. Henry. He told
that the a relative as well as
the police officer. SCA held
that he was correctly
convicted. Appeal was
dismissed.
Minister van Polisie v Ewels Plaintiff was assaulted in a Omission
1975 police station by another Person in serving office
police officer while other Did not intervene to assist
police officers was looking. when on duty or able to do
These policemen could have so.
prevented the assault.
Plaintiff is claiming damages
from the Minister of Police
– even thou Minister of
Police was not sued in his
personal capacity claim is
regarded against state,
conduct is in question and
took place in the course of
their duties. Rumpff CJ held
that due to the
circumstances the duty of
the policemen where to
assist the plaintiff. It was
their legal duty and because
it was an omission that took
place while they were on
duty the defendant is liable.
The officer had a duty to
report the assault and to
help the plaintive.
Carmichele v Minister of Woman was brutally States duty to protect
Safety and Security 2001 assaulted by X who has against crime
been on bail and awaiting
trial for rape and attempted
murder another victim.
Woman claimed damages
from state on basis that
police and prosecuting
3|Page
Relevant Cases
Case Name Basic outline Relevance
S v Masiya 2007 (CC) Accused of rape 9yr. via Principal of legality
anus. Common-law did not ius praevium & ius strictum
see it as rape. Magistrate rules:
court found accused guilty act should be recognised as
of rape. He appealed. High a crime at the time of its
Court found in favour of commission (s 35(3)(1))
Magistrate court ruling. He &
appealed. CC found that courts should interpret the
the common-law definition defi nitions of crime strictly
needs to be extended to no express provision, but can
incl. it. Masiya was found be inferred from the general
not guilty of rape but guilty right to afair trial guaranteed
of indecent assault. in s 35(3)
Director of Public Accused of sexually assault Principal of legality
Prosecutions, Western Cape by touching breast and Nullum crimen sine lege &
v Prins 2012(SCA) private parts. He objected nulla poene rule:
saying that the Act does not
provide for a penalty for the No crime without law & no
offence created in s5(1). punishment without law
Wording in the Act is clear.
Magistrate court upheld the
decision. Director of Public
Prosecutions appealed to
High Court of Western
Cape. High Court concluded
that in the absence of a
penalty in the Act, the
charged failed to disclose an
offence. Appeal was
dismissed.
R v Dlamini 1955 The accused was half awake Requirement of an act
out of a nightmare and he Psychogenic automatism
stabbed the deceased 3 (Sane Automatism)
times. Price J held that the Momentarily acted like a
case had many unusual robot
features. The only eye
witness account differed
from that of the accused.
The accused was also good
friends with the deceased
father. There was no
1|Page
,CRW2601 Study Notes May/June 2015 Exam
motive for accused to kill
the deceased.
Accused was acting
mechanically – under the
influence of a nightmare –
not guilty of murder – no
proof of negligence – not
guilty of culpable homicide.
S v Henry 1999 Husband and wife are Requirement of an act
divorced. Have 3 daughters. Psychogenic automatism
Live with mother. Father – (Sane Automatism)
the appellant – has certain Momentarily acted like a
time he may see them. One robot
of the daughters spend the
weekend with the accused.
At the end of the weekend
daughter phone mother to
ask if she can stay with the
appellant till morning.
mother said no. the
appellant drove to his ex-
wife’s house with a firearm
in the car. Appellant and
wife quarrelled and wife
tried to push appellant
away. At this moment the
appellant became enraged –
according to evidence he
heard a zinging noise in his
ears and shouting going on
in his head. Appellant shot
his ex-wife and her mother
firing 3 times at both of
them killing them. Was
charged with inter alia – 2
counts of murder. His
defence held the sane
automatism. Court rejected
the defence and he was
charged. He appealed to
the SCA.
Scott JA held that if the
appellants actions was
involuntary must be
weighed up and considered
in light of the circumstances
specially against the
2|Page
, CRW2601 Study Notes May/June 2015 Exam
criminal conduct. The
testimony of the appalment
was that he had no
recollection of the event.
But as he returned to his car
he told his daughter that he
thought that he might have
shot Mrs. Henry. He told
that the a relative as well as
the police officer. SCA held
that he was correctly
convicted. Appeal was
dismissed.
Minister van Polisie v Ewels Plaintiff was assaulted in a Omission
1975 police station by another Person in serving office
police officer while other Did not intervene to assist
police officers was looking. when on duty or able to do
These policemen could have so.
prevented the assault.
Plaintiff is claiming damages
from the Minister of Police
– even thou Minister of
Police was not sued in his
personal capacity claim is
regarded against state,
conduct is in question and
took place in the course of
their duties. Rumpff CJ held
that due to the
circumstances the duty of
the policemen where to
assist the plaintiff. It was
their legal duty and because
it was an omission that took
place while they were on
duty the defendant is liable.
The officer had a duty to
report the assault and to
help the plaintive.
Carmichele v Minister of Woman was brutally States duty to protect
Safety and Security 2001 assaulted by X who has against crime
been on bail and awaiting
trial for rape and attempted
murder another victim.
Woman claimed damages
from state on basis that
police and prosecuting
3|Page
