CAS1501 Assignment 3 – (2025 Semester 1) due 17 April 2025
Total: 100 marks
📘 Question 1 (25 marks)
Explain the elements of a crime in South African criminal law. Use case law to support your
answer.
✍️ Model Answer:
In South African criminal law, four main elements must be proven for conduct to be considered
a crime:
1. Legality (nullum crimen sine lege):
This principle means no one may be convicted of a crime unless their conduct was
defined as a crime by law at the time it was committed.
Case: S v De Blom 1977 (3) SA 513 (A) – Ignorance of the law is generally not a defence.
2. Conduct (actus reus):
There must be an act or omission that is voluntary. Physical movement is required
unless the law criminalises an omission.
Case: S v Bernardus 1965 (3) SA 287 (A) – Act must be voluntary to be punishable.
, 3. Causation (factual and legal):
The accused’s conduct must be both the factual and legal cause of the consequence.
Case: S v Mokgethi 1990 (1) SA 32 (A) – Court distinguished between factual cause and
legal cause.
4. Unlawfulness:
The conduct must be unlawful, meaning there are no legal justifications such as private
defence or necessity.
Case: S v Goliath 1972 (3) SA 1 (A) – Necessity can sometimes be a defence.
5. Culpability (mens rea):
The accused must have had the necessary blameworthy state of mind, such as intention
(dolus) or negligence (culpa).
Case: S v Ngubane 1985 (3) SA 677 (A) – Clarified difference between intention and
motive.
These elements ensure that only blameworthy conduct is punished, and they uphold the rule of
law and fairness in criminal justice.
📘 Question 2 (25 marks)
Discuss the difference between intention (dolus) and negligence (culpa) in South African
criminal law. Provide examples.
Total: 100 marks
📘 Question 1 (25 marks)
Explain the elements of a crime in South African criminal law. Use case law to support your
answer.
✍️ Model Answer:
In South African criminal law, four main elements must be proven for conduct to be considered
a crime:
1. Legality (nullum crimen sine lege):
This principle means no one may be convicted of a crime unless their conduct was
defined as a crime by law at the time it was committed.
Case: S v De Blom 1977 (3) SA 513 (A) – Ignorance of the law is generally not a defence.
2. Conduct (actus reus):
There must be an act or omission that is voluntary. Physical movement is required
unless the law criminalises an omission.
Case: S v Bernardus 1965 (3) SA 287 (A) – Act must be voluntary to be punishable.
, 3. Causation (factual and legal):
The accused’s conduct must be both the factual and legal cause of the consequence.
Case: S v Mokgethi 1990 (1) SA 32 (A) – Court distinguished between factual cause and
legal cause.
4. Unlawfulness:
The conduct must be unlawful, meaning there are no legal justifications such as private
defence or necessity.
Case: S v Goliath 1972 (3) SA 1 (A) – Necessity can sometimes be a defence.
5. Culpability (mens rea):
The accused must have had the necessary blameworthy state of mind, such as intention
(dolus) or negligence (culpa).
Case: S v Ngubane 1985 (3) SA 677 (A) – Clarified difference between intention and
motive.
These elements ensure that only blameworthy conduct is punished, and they uphold the rule of
law and fairness in criminal justice.
📘 Question 2 (25 marks)
Discuss the difference between intention (dolus) and negligence (culpa) in South African
criminal law. Provide examples.
