S v Zinn 1969
Principle: Theory of Punishment
Facts: Accused committed multiple fraud and theft over 8 years.
Significance: Combination theory – triad of crime, the criminal and interests of society.
S v Francis 1994
Principle: Legality – criminal norm
Facts: Accused absconded from rehabilitation centre after Act changed regarding criminal norm.
Significance: No criminal norm = no prosecution or conviction.
S v Masiya 2007
Principle: Legality – Constitutionality of broadening definition of common law crime
Facts: Accused committed anal sex with 9 year old girl.
Significance: criticized judgment – Courts not there to make law. S 39(2) more applicable to civil law as criminal law
protected by s 35(3) (l) and (n)
S v Mshumpa 2008
Principle: Legality – unborn child
Facts: Accused conspired to kill unborn child
Significance: Left broadening of crime to legislature.
R v Dhlamini 1955
Principle: Requirement of act.
Facts: Accused awoke from nightmare and stabbed victim No motive or volition.
Significance: Automatism – asleep – could not commit crime.
S v Trickett 1973
Principle: Legality – Sane Automatism
Facts: Accused had blackout while driving, swerved into car and killed driver.
Significance: a) if caused by mental disease, onus on defendant
b) if caused by drowsiness etc – negligence
c) if caused by involuntary induced state onus on prosecution. Accused must lay foundation with medical
or expert evidence.
S v Henry 1999
Principle: Requirement of act – Sane Automatism
Facts: Accused shot ex wife and MIL after argument.
Significance: Accused must lay foundation if raises defence of sane automatism.
Minister van Polisie v Ewels 1975
Principle: Act – Omission – Legal Duty
Facts: Complainant was assaulted in charge-office. Police failed to protect.
Significance: Legal duty to act. Constitutional and statutory duty on police.
S v Leeuw 1975
Principle: Act - impossibility
Facts: Accused drove car without license. Lived in restricted area and restricted person Difficult to get license.
Significance: Inconvenience or difficulty does not constitute impossibility. Positive duty is requirement for impossibility
defense.
Principle: Causation – casual link
Principle: Theory of Punishment
Facts: Accused committed multiple fraud and theft over 8 years.
Significance: Combination theory – triad of crime, the criminal and interests of society.
S v Francis 1994
Principle: Legality – criminal norm
Facts: Accused absconded from rehabilitation centre after Act changed regarding criminal norm.
Significance: No criminal norm = no prosecution or conviction.
S v Masiya 2007
Principle: Legality – Constitutionality of broadening definition of common law crime
Facts: Accused committed anal sex with 9 year old girl.
Significance: criticized judgment – Courts not there to make law. S 39(2) more applicable to civil law as criminal law
protected by s 35(3) (l) and (n)
S v Mshumpa 2008
Principle: Legality – unborn child
Facts: Accused conspired to kill unborn child
Significance: Left broadening of crime to legislature.
R v Dhlamini 1955
Principle: Requirement of act.
Facts: Accused awoke from nightmare and stabbed victim No motive or volition.
Significance: Automatism – asleep – could not commit crime.
S v Trickett 1973
Principle: Legality – Sane Automatism
Facts: Accused had blackout while driving, swerved into car and killed driver.
Significance: a) if caused by mental disease, onus on defendant
b) if caused by drowsiness etc – negligence
c) if caused by involuntary induced state onus on prosecution. Accused must lay foundation with medical
or expert evidence.
S v Henry 1999
Principle: Requirement of act – Sane Automatism
Facts: Accused shot ex wife and MIL after argument.
Significance: Accused must lay foundation if raises defence of sane automatism.
Minister van Polisie v Ewels 1975
Principle: Act – Omission – Legal Duty
Facts: Complainant was assaulted in charge-office. Police failed to protect.
Significance: Legal duty to act. Constitutional and statutory duty on police.
S v Leeuw 1975
Principle: Act - impossibility
Facts: Accused drove car without license. Lived in restricted area and restricted person Difficult to get license.
Significance: Inconvenience or difficulty does not constitute impossibility. Positive duty is requirement for impossibility
defense.
Principle: Causation – casual link
