Nicholas)Brodie)
INTRODUCTION)
• Criminal(law"is"a"brunch"of"national"law"that"defines"“crime”"and"provides"repercussions"for"
committing"a"crime."Natural"law"is"broken"up"into"‘Procedural"law’"and"‘substantive"law.’"""""
1)"Procedural"law"are"the"rules"that"enforce"substantive"law,"e.g."criminal/civil"procedure"""""""
2)"Substantive"law"is"further"divided"into"(i)"public"law:"between"individual"&"state,"e.g."tax,"
criminal,"admin"laws,"&"(ii)"private"law:"between"individuals,"e.g."family,"contract"laws."
• A"‘crime’"is"conduct"which"is"legally"forbidden"which"is"put"into"place"&"enforced"by"state."
Crime( Delict(
Investigator"="state,"Complainant"="3rd"party." Complainant"="plaintiff."
State"must"investigate"&"prosecute." Individual"can"choose"to"sue."
Directed"in"public"interest." Directed"against"individual."
Purpose"is"to"punish"for"society." Purpose"is"to"compensate."
Beyond"a"reasonable"doubt"standard"of" Balance"of"probability"standard"of"proof."
proof"as"criminal"law"favours"liberty."
• Fundamental(principles:" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""
1)"Favour"Liberty:"where"the"law"is"unclear/ambigious"you"must"favour"liberty"&"give"benefit"
of"the"doubt." " " " " " " " " " """"""""""
2)"There"is"no"crime"without"law,"nullem&cimen&sine&lege.& & & & &&&&&&&&&&&
3)"There"is"no"punishment"without"law,"nullem&poena&sine&lege.""
• Punishment:"can"only"occur"if"a"crime"existed"before"the"act,"statutory"crimes"should"be"
clear"with"clear"repercussions,"common"law"crimes"should"be"clearly"defined"&"settled,"
criminal"law"should"be"accessible."Punishment"is"found"in"two"different"theories"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
1)(Absolute/retributive"theory"believes"that"a"crime"is"an"end"in"itself,"or"just"deserts,"it"is"a"
backward"looking"theory"&"corrects"the"legal"balance"that"was"disturbed"by"the"crime"
through"retribution"by"means"of"punishment." " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""
2)"Relative/utilitarian"theory"believes"that"punishment"must"lead"to"another"end.""""""""""""""""""
(i)"Preventative"theory:"stop"the"crime"happening"again,"reinforcing"a"law"abiding"society.""
(ii)"Deterrent"theory:"to"deter"others"that"see"punishment"happening"but"does"this"work?""""""""""""
(iii)"Rehabilitation"theory:"to"reform"the"criminals,"better"for"younger"criminals.""
• In"order"to"find"a"person"guilty"of"a"crime"that"must"fulfil"the"‘Actus&Reus’&&"‘Mens&Rea’"
elements"of"a"crime."
• Actus&reus"is"made"up"of"Conduct;"Causation;"Voluntariness;"Unlawfulness."These"are"the"
conduct"elements"of"the"crime."The"mind"is"not"taken"into"account"in"this"section."
• Mens&rea"is"made"up"of"Fault/Blameworhtiness;"Capacity."These"are"the"mental"elements"to"
a"crime."The"action"is"not"taken"into"account"in"this"section."
CONDUCT)
Guilty"thoughts"must"show"themselves"in"conduct,"thoughts"are"not"illegal"as"1)"it"is"impossible"to"
prove"a"mental"state."2)"It"is"impossible"to"punish"all"people"who"have"guilty"thoughts."3)"Criminal"
1"
"
law"favours"liberty"&"cannot"punish"for"day"dreams"that"do"not"result"in"conduct."4)"How"do"we"
distinguish"between"thought"&"intent?"
Commissions:(are"positive"acts"of"HUMAN"conduct,"there"is"an"exception"to"this"of"juristic"people,"
e.g."companies,"where"a"director"acts"for"them."Commissions"are"divided"into"two"categories:"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
(1)"Circumstance"crimes:"a"certain"type"of"conduct"or"‘state"of"affairs’"is"prohibited"irrespective"of"
the"end"result,"e.g."drunk"driving,"possession"of"narcotics."" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" " """""""""""
(2)"Consequence"Crimes:"the"end"result"of"a"specific"conduct"is"prohibited,"e.g."murder,"culpable"
homicide." " " " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""
(NB)"Vicarious"Liability:"where"a"person"who"did"not"commit"the"offence"is"held"liable"for"the"act"of"
another,"there"must"always"be"a"person"who"acted"wrongly/negligently,"e.g."selling"alcohol"to"a"
minor,"the"bartender"committed"the"conduct"but"the"owner"will"suffer"the"penalties."
Omissions:(are"negative"acts"where"a"person"fails"to"act"when"they"had"a"duty"to."Omissions"are"not"
always"crimes"and"as"a"general"rule"the"law"does"NOT"impose"a"duty"on"us"to"act"for"another,"in"
particular"if"it"may"endanger"our"own"lives,"“a"person"is"not"under"a"legal"duty"to"protect"another"
from"harm"even"if"they"should"morally"do"so”"(Ewels)"."We"are"autonomous"individuals"responsible"
for"our"own"well"being."
2"
"
Unlawfulness(test"was"created"in"Ewels"which"asks"“in"the"circumstances"would"the"community"
require"a"legal"conviction"&"duty"to"act.”"
Crystallized(categories(have"been"made"using"the"unlawfulness"principle"in"order"to"help"us"
determine"when"an"omission"can"be"considered"illegal.(
1. Prior(Conduct"states"that"if"you"have"created"a"potentially"dangerous"situation"you"are"
under"a"legal"duty"to"protect"others"from"it,"e.g."if"X"lights"a"fire"in"the"bush.""
2. Control(of(a(potentially(dangerous(object,"a"person"is"under"a"legal"duty"to"ensure"it"does"
not"cause"harm."The"accused"need"not"be"the"owner"of"the"thing.(
3. Special(Protective(Relationship"is"where"a"person"has"a"special"interest"in"another"that"
imposes"a"duty"on"that"person"to"protect"the"other,"failure"to"do"so"is"unlawful"(Ewels)."
Ewels"above"is"an"example"of"a"special"protective"relationship."
3"
"
Case:"S"v"B"1994" " " " " " " " " """""""""""""""
Deals(with:"A"parent’s"special"protective"relationship"over"their"own"children." """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"Parents(must"try"reasonably"to"save"their"children"from"drowning."
Case:"S"v"A"1993" " " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(A"parent’s"special"protective"relationship"over"their"own"children." " """"""""""""""""""""
Facts:"A"mother"was"held"guilty"for"assault"for"having"failed"to"stop"her"boyfriend"from"assaulting"her"
children." " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:"Parents"must"protect"their"children"from"abuse."
4. Public(office"is"where"someone’s"office"imposes"a"duty"to"act,"then"they"must"do"so,"e.g."
fireman/policeman."The"person"has"to"however"be"on"duty."Ewels"above"is"an"example.(
5. Statute(can"create"a"duty"to"omit"from"doing"something"such"as"a"state"of"affairs."If"you"
create"a"state"of"affairs"it"equates"to"conduct"(Achterdam)."If"you"do"not"discontinue"the"
state"of"affairs"that"you"know"of"it"equates"to"conduct"(Brick)."
6. Contract/common(law/court(order"can"place"a"duty"to"act"when"you"would"not"normally"
have"done"so,"i.e."the"court"may"force"you"to"act"in"favour"of"another."Statute"places"a"duty"
on"all"people"to"report"acts"of"treason"&"domestic"violence."
Case:"S"v"Pitwood"2002" " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:"Contracts"that"create"a"legal"duty." " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""
Facts:"A"man"was"employed"to"close"a"gate"every"time"a"train"passed"through"his"station,"one"day"he"
failed"to"do"so"and"a"number"of"people"were"injured"as"a"result." " " " """"""""""""""""
Principle:"An"employment"contract"can"create"a"duty"so"that"an"omission"to"do"the"job"is"illegal."
VOLUNTARINESS)
In"order"to"prove"conduct"an"act"must"have"been"voluntary,"voluntariness"is"therefore"a"subset"of"
conduct"which"is"predicted"on"freedwill"&"based"of"free"choice.""Things"like"provocation,"
4"
"
hypoglycaemia"(low"blood"sugar),"epilepsy,"concussion"or"hysterical"fits"can"lead"to"a"lack"of"
voluntariness."It"is"not"a"requirement"of"voluntariness"that"the"accused"make"a"rational"decision,"
therefore"a"child"or"mentally"ill"person"can"still"act"voluntarily."
Definition(of"voluntariness"is"‘the"ability"to"subject"ones"bodily"movements"to"one’s"own"conscious"
will.’"For"example"reflex"movements"&"spasms,"unconscious"acts"during"sleep"(somnambulism)"or"
sever"intoxication.""
Absolute(force(is"where"voluntariness"is"completely"negated."For"instance"if"Y"is"chopping"and"X"who"
is"much"bigger"&"stronger"that"Y"grab’s"Y’s"hand"&"directs"it"into"Y’s"chest."
Relative(force(is"where"a"person"can"subject"their"bodily"movements"to"their"own"will,"they"are"
therefore"voluntary,"however"they"may"claim"necessity"as"a"ground"of"justification."For"instance"if"Z"
orders"X"to"shoot"&"kill"Y"&"threatens"to"kill"X"if"he"does"not"do"so."
Automatism(is"where"a"person"is"unable"to"subject"their"body"to"their"conscious"will."It"is"found"in"
two"forms"(1)(Sane(Automatism:(where"the"accused"is"mentally"sane"&"momentarily"becomes"
involuntary"due"to"some"external"stimuli,"goes"towards"negating"voluntariness.((2)(Insane(
Automatism:(where"the"accused"suffer"from"a"mental"pathology/illness,"this"goes"towards"negating"
capacity."
Sane(Automatism( Insane(Automatism(
Onus"remains"on"the"state"to"prove"beyond"a" Higher"burden,"the"law"assumes"that"all"people"
reasonable"doubt." are"sane,"onus"is"on"the"accused"to"negate"
capacity."
Always"nondpathological"or"temporary." Pathological"disturbance."
"
Case:"R"v"Mkiza"1959" " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:"Lack"of"voluntariness"through"epileptic"fit.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Facts:(The"accused"was"cutting"meat"in"a"kitchen"&"suffered"an"epileptic"fit,"he"inflicted"serious"stab"
wounds"on"his"sister"&"she"subsequently"died."It"was"proven"on"a"balance"of"probabilities"that"the"
accused"did"in"fact"suffer"an"epileptic"fit"&"was"in"an"unconscious"state,"the"act"was"therefore"a"
reflex"and"not"voluntary,"accused"acquitted."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(An"epileptic"fit(can"lead"to"a"lack"of"voluntariness."
Antecedent(liability"(Actio&in&Libera&Causa)"is"a"term"that"states"that"if"an"accused"knew"of"their"
illness"&"acted"negligently"to"it"the"court"looks"at"it"as"if"the"cause"was"in"the"accuser’s"power."The"
test"is"if"there"was"a"time"immediately"prior"to"the"state"during"which"the"accused"was"blameworthy,"
5"
"
i.e."preceding"the"automatism"did"actus&reus&&"mens&rea&coincide."3"elements"1)(Prior"conduct"2)(
immediately"before"3)(blameworthiness/fault"(culpa/dolus).""
Case:"R"v"Victor"1942" " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:"Voluntariness"through"epileptic"fit,"using"antecedent"liability.((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(The"accused"was"charged"with"negligent"driving,"he"had"suffered"an"epileptic"fit"behind"the"
wheel"&"collided"with"a"car"&"pedestrian,"his"defence"was"that"he"was"involuntary"from"the"fit."
Evidence"before"the"court"was"that"prior"to"a"fit"there"is"a"warning"signal"&"a"reasonable"would"have"
pulled"over,"but"on"the"facts"the"court"was"not"prepared"to"say"if"the"accused"had"a"warning"signal."
The"2nd"argument"was"that"the"accused"knew"he"was"very"prone"to"epilepsy,"so"even"if"there"was"no"
warning"signal"his"conduct"was"voluntary,"accused"found"guilty." " " " """""""""""""""
Principle:"The"accused"acted"negligently"to"the"knowledge"of"his"condition"&"is"therefore"guilty."
NB"the"time"of"the"automatism"must"be"established,"as"blacking"out"during"the"incident"does"not"
negate"capacity"only"if"it"is"before"the"incident."
Intoxication"is"a"socially"reprehensible"practice"of"taking"in"a"substance"knowing"of"its"effects"&"is"
viewed"with"circumspection"in"law."However"normally"it"doesn’t"matter"what"causes"the"
automatism."NB(can(negate(capacity,(voluntariness(&(intention.(The"Criminal"law"amendment"act"
has"made"relying"on"incapacity"due"to"intoxication"a"criminal"offence.""
6"
"
Case:"S"v"Chretien"(Postd1981)" " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:"Intoxication." " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""
Facts:"The"accused"was"involved"in"a"fight"at"a"party,"he"decided"to"leave"the"party"got"into"his"car"&"
hit"some"people."Court"held"in"order"for"a"person"to"be"involuntary"by"means"of"alcohol"they"must"be"
“dead"drunk,”" that"is"performing"random"muscular"movements,"which"he"was"not"as"he"was"cable"
to"drive"to"an"extent."The"judgement"overruled"the"Johnston"judgement.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(An"accused"must"be"“dead"drunk”"to"use"intoxication"to"negate"voluntariness."
Sane(v(Insane(automatism(
Proof(of(voluntariness(lies"on"the"state"to"prove"beyond"a"reasonable"doubt,"this"legal"principle"
never"shifts."An"evidentiary"burden"however"lies"on"the"accused"to"discharge"beyond"a"reasonable"
doubt"the"evidence"produced"by"the"state,"otherwise"an"accused"could"remain"quiet,"deny"the"
charges"&"wait"for"the"state"to"try"to"prove"guilt."In"this"way"voluntariness"is"assumed."
7"
"
Case:"S"v"Trickett"1973" " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(An"accuser’s"evidentiary"burden." " " " " " " """""""""""""""
Facts:("The"accused"was"involved"in"a"car"crash,"she"had"suddenly"swerved"onto"the"other"side"of"the"
road"into"another"vehicle."Defence"was"that"she"had"blacked"out"but"there"was"no"medical"evidence"
to"support"this"claim,"she"did"not"even"use"the"term"‘sane"automatism’"in"her"defence."The"court"
held"that"some"kind"of"medical"evidence"must"be"presented"in"order"to"claim"voluntariness,"even"
though"her"testimony"was"good"she"had"not"raised"a"strong"enough"defence,"there"was"no"
statement"that"she"was"suffering"from"a"sane"automatic"state,"found"guilty."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(An"accused"must"produce"evidence"if"they"raise"a"defence"of"sane"automatism."
page 94
CAUSATION) Act Consequence
In"order"to"prove"causation"it"must"be"established"that"the"accused"caused"the"unlawful"act,"we"
must"identify"&"test"the"act"(causal"chain)."Causation"is"made"up"of"two"factors,"factual"causation"&"
legal"causation."Causation"is"only"an"issue"in"consequence"crimes." chain of causation
Factual(causation((FC)"uses"the"condictio&sine&quanon"or"the"“but(for(test,”"which"asks"but"for"the"
accused"conduct"would"the"unlawful"consequence"have"ensued"when"it"did,"e.g."would"the"victim"
have"died"when"they"did,"if"no"then"the"accused"is"a"factual"cause."This"test"however"throws"the"
scope"of"liability"too"wide"&"often"there"is"more"than"one"FC."It"is"also"possible"that"nodone"is"the"FC,"
e.g."simultaneous"shooting,"in"which"case"we"ask"if"the"accused"contributed"materially"to"the"
* where conduct takes the form of a positive act , the question is asked
unlawful"consequence." * the consequence in question would not have occured at all or would not have occured
when it did
Case:"S"v"Hartman"1975"" " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:"Factual"cause"of"death." " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""
Facts:"The"accused"was"a"doctor"who"killed"his"87"year"old"father"who"was"suffering"from"incurable"
cancer,"who"was"in"any"even"near"death,"by"injection"of"a"lethal"overdose"of"anaesthetic"by"mistake"
to"help"relieve"pain."He"was"obviously"the"LC"but"was"he"a"FC?"“But"for"his"conduct"would"his"father"
have"died"when"he"did,”"no"therefore"he"was"found"guilty." " " " " """"""""""""""
Principle:""“when"he"did”"is"the"defining"factor"for"finding"an"FC.""
Legal(causation((LC)"narrows"the"FC"scope"of"liability"to"the"closest"cause"of"death."It"asks"who(the(
most(sufficient(cause(of(the(end(result(was"using"3"tests,"the"proximate"cause"test,"the"adequate"
cause"test"&"the"Nova&causa&interveniens&test"(NCI)."None"of"the"tests"are"paramount"&"all"be"used"
in"conjunction"with"each"other."
Proximate(cause(asks"who/what"in&terms&of&value&in&time"is"the"most"direct"cause"of"the"unlawful"
consequence."“Whoever"hastened"the"death"will"be"the"most"proximate"cause”"(Hartmann).""
Adequate(cause&asks"if"in&the&normal&course&of&human&experience,"does"the"conduct"of"the"accused"
end"in"the"unlawful"consequence."" (generalisation theory)
Nova%causa%interveniens%asks"if"there"is"an"intervening&event/disruption"between"the"conduct"of"the"
accused"&"the"unlawful"consequence"that"would"break"the"chain"of"causation."There"are"3"
requirements"that"an"intervening"event"must"fill"in"order"to"break"the"chain"of"causation."(1)(The"
intervening"event"must"be"an"abnormal/unusual/unexpected"one,"look"at"foresight."(2)(The"event"
must"be"independent"of"the"accused"conduct."(3)(The"event"must"be"a"FC"of"death."If"there"is"a"NCI"
found"then"the"accused"conduct"is"not"guilty"conduct."
negative test for causation
breaks chain of causation - original
8"
cause is no longer ause
"
Case:"Minister"of"Police"v"Skosana" ( (
delictual (
case ( ( ( ((((((((((((((((
Deals(with:(Applying"the"FC"&"LC"tests." " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""
Facts:"The"police"had"custody"of"the"deceased"who"was"complaining"of"stomach"cramps"&"asked"to"
be"taken"to"a"doctor,"the"police"failed"to"do"so"fast"enough"and"the"man"died"when"eventually"
reaching"a"hospital."The"court"applied"the"FC"test"first"and"found"the"officers"were"the"FC,"they"then"
applied"the"NCI"test"&"found"the"death"was"not"to"far"removed"from"the"death.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Omission"to"act"can"serve"as"conduct.""
Factors(in(assessing(NCI""
1. Subjective(foreseeUability:"as"the"event"is"an"abnormal/unusual/unexpected"one"a"
reasonable"person"must"not"be"able"to"foresee"the"unlawful"consequence"happening,"e.g."if"
A"encourages"B"to"commit"suicide"&"foresees"he"will"did"it,"the"suicide"will"not"serve"as"an"
NCI."
2. PreUexisting(conditions:"The"accused"conduct"would"lead"to"serious"injury,"medical"attention"
Text
is"given"but"the"victim"still"dies,"or"there"is"a"lack"of"proper"attention"given"by"the"victim"to"
the"condition."Seeking"medical"help"is"not"abnormal"therefore"we"must"determine"if"the"
victim"died"of"the"accused"or"his"own"conduct."
9"
"
that"his"victim’s"religious"belief"was"an"intervening"event,"accused"found"guilty.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Thin"Skull"rule(
Thin(skull(rule(includes"physical,"societal"&"beliefs."It"doesn’t"affect"fault"only"causation,"a"person"
may"not"be"negligent"&"a"person"may"not"be"guilty.""
3. Medical(Intervention:(If"X"assaults"Y"who"is"then"given"the"wrong"medical"treatment"which"
leads"to"death,"did"the"treatment"act"as"an"NCI,"it"is"not"abnormal"to"seek"medical"help"&"it"is"
page 102 not"that"unusual"that"medical"treatment"will"be"given"negligently."No"direct"authority"(no"
NCI)."
encouragement to commit suicide
Case:"R"v"Mabole"1968" " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:"Medical"attention"as"an"NCI." " " " " " " """""""""""""""""
Facts:"The"accused"stabbed"the"victim"in"the"abdomen,"the"wound"was"not"deemed"very"bad"
however"his"condition"continued"to"deteriorate."A"surgeon"proposed"exploratory"surgery"which"was"
performed"&"confirmed"no"penetrating"wounds"were"present."The"surgery"resulted"in"a"fatal"
pulmonary"embolism"(air"bubble/clot)"&"the"victim"died."The"court"held"that"provided"that"medical"
attention"is"given"with"reasonable"efficiency"&"good"will"a"patient"cannot"complain"&"it"does"not"
serve"as"an"NCI."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(If"medical"attention"is"given"with"reasonable"efficiency"&"good"will"it"is"not"an"NCI."
Case:"S"v"Williams"1986" " " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Medical"attention"as"an"NCI." ( ( ( ( ( ( ((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(The"accused"shot"the"victim"through"the"neck"which"resulted"in"a"massive"amount"of"blood"
loss,"she"received"treatment"&"was"put"on"a"respirator."She"was"later"diagnosed"as"brain"dead,"her"
heart"&"lungs"were"only"functioning"via"the"respirator,"the"time"of"death"was"not"decided."The"
respirator"was"removed"&"accused"argued"that"the"removal"was"the"intervening"event."On"the"
assumption"that"a"person"is"alive"until"the"heart"stops"beating,"disconnecting"the"respirator"was"
merely"discontinuing"a"fruitless"attempt"at"keeping"the"victim"legally"alive,"no"improper"treatment"
was"given." " " " " " " " " " """""""""""""""
Principle:"If"there"is"proper"treatment"there"is"no"NCI."
10"
"
Case:"S"v"Ramosunya"2000"" " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Medical"attention"as"an"NCI.( ( ( ( ( ( ( ((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:"The"accused"stabbed"his"motherdindlaw"4"times"in"the"collarbone,"who"was"then"treated"in"
hospital"for"6"days"&"discharged."She"died"at"home"a"day"later"from"a"sepsis"of"the"lungs,"the"autopsy"
confirmed"the"sepsis"could"have"had"a"number"of"causes"&"the"accused"argued"that"the"hospital"was"
grossly"negligent"&"she"was"not"in"a"stable"condition."As"there"could"have"been"a"number"of"
reasonable"causes"for"the"sepsis"the"state"were"not"proving"beyond"a"reasonable"doubt"that"the"
accused"conduct"caused"death,"failing"better"evidence"the"accused"was"not"liable"for"murder."
Principle:(There"is"judicial"reluctance"to"rule"later"medical"treatment"will"be"construed"as"a"NCI,"if"
there"is"no"evidence"of"gross"negligence"it"will"not"be"unusual"enough."
4. Successive(assaults:(Where"one"accused"will"perform"an"act"making"a"victim"an"easy"target"
&"another"accused"will"perform"a"subsequent"fatal"act."Hunt’s&Principle:&if"the"original"injury"
is"(1)"a"mortal"one"&"(2)"combines"physiologically"with"the"latter"injury,"the"latter"injury"does"
not"serve"as"an"NCI.(
11"
"
Case:"S"v"Burger"1975" " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Appling"Hunt’s"principle."" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""
Facts:(The"accused"assaulted"X"by"administering"a"few"hard"kicks"to"his"stomach,"which"caused"a"
perforation"on"the"small"intestine."Two"days"later"X"was"assaulted"by"two"other"men."Medical"
evidence"showed"that"the"original"accused"conduct"caused"death"&"subsequent"conduct"hastened"it,"
the"accused"was"guilty"of"culpable"homicide." " " " " " """""""""""""
Principle:(Application"of"the"two"rules"of"Hunt’s"principle."
FAULT)
Falls"under"Mens"Rea"&"can"be"present"in"the"form"of"either"intention"(Dolus)"or"negligence"(Culpa),"
the"kind"of"fault"is"normally"defined"by"the"crime,"e.g."murder"="Dolus;"culpable"homicide"="Culpa."All"
common"law"crimes"require"dolus"for"conviction,"except"CH,"statutory"crimes"will"indicate"what"
12"
"
mens&rea"is"needed,"otherwise"it"will"be"determined."Strict"liability"crimes"do"not"need"fault"for"an"
accused"to"be"guilty,"i.e."speeding"in"a"car.""
mens%rea%must(extend(to(every(element"of"a"crime,"e.g."Murder"is"the"(1)"unlawful"(2)"intentional"(3)"
killing"of"another"(4)"human"being.""A"person"must"foresee"and"act"recklessly"to"all"of"these"elements"
in"order"to"be"guilty.""
The(mens%rea%must(be(contemporaneous"(at"the"same"time)"with"the"actus&rea."E.g."say"‘A’"fails"
criminal"law"&"plots"to"kill"his"lecturer,"buys"a"gun,"and"generally"gets"prepared"to"do"the"act."
However"while"his"is"driving"he"is"involved"in"an"accident"&"kills"his"lecturer,"his"intention"does"not"
exist"at"the"time"of"the"accident"and"so"he"is"only"guilty"of"culpable"homicide."
o INTENTION"(DOLUS)(
This"is"the"legal,"not"societal,"form"of"intention,"it"is"therefore"possible"to"legally"intend"to"kill"
without"actually"wanting"to"kill"someone."There"are"3"forms"of"intention"
1) Dolus&directus:"where"one"intends"a"certain"outcome/aim"&"meets"that"outcome/aim."
2) Dolus&indirectus:"where"one"has"a"certain"outcome/aim"but"they"know"in"order"to"achieve"it"
that"another"unlawful"consequence"will"ensue.""
3) Dolus&eventualis:"is"sufficient"for"a"conviction"(De"Bruyn)"&"must"show"that"the"accused"(1)"
foresaw"a"(2)"real"possibility"of"the"unlawful"consequence"&"(3)"acted"recklessly"to"that"
foresight."
Doctrine(of(‘Vesari’(holds"that"if"an"accused"embarks"on"an"unlawful"act"with"intention,"then"every"
single"unlawful"deed"that"stems"from"that"initial"wrongddoing"will"be"imputed"to"him."This"goes"
against"the"contemporaneous"principle"&"is"not"longer"valid"in"our"law."E.g."a"man"who"is"illegally"
hunting"shoots"a"man"which"he"thought"was"a"buck,"he"is"liable"for"murder."
13"
"
Case:"R"v"Matsepe"1931"" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Use"of"the"Vesari"principle.( ( ( ( ( ( ( ((((((((((((((((
Facts:(The"accused"was"a"driver"of"a"truck"&"without"his"knowledge"a"child"climbed"onto"the"back"
while"he"was"driving,"he"negligently"crashes"into"a"tree"&"the"child"dies."The"accused"was"performing"
an"unlawful"negligent"act"so"the"mens&rea&is"imputed"onto"the"consequence,"the"accused"is"guilty"of"
culpable"homicide." " " " " " " " " """""""""""""
Principle:(The"accused"conduct"is"imputed"due"to"the"fact"that"his"initial"conduct"was"illegal."
dolus%(directus%&(dolus%(indirectus(are"intention"proper"i.e."the"accused"intended"the"result."
14"
"
Case:"R"v"Jolly"1923" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Differentiating"between"dolus&"directus&&"dolus&"indirectus." ( ( (((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(Accused"were"strikers"who"derailed"a"train"with"the"intent"to"disrupt"raildtraffic,"they"did"not"
intend"to"kill/harm"anyone"&"in"reality"nodone"was"seriously"injured."The"accused"were"charged"with"
assault"with"intent"to"murder,"there"could"not"be"dolus&"directus&or"dolus&"indirectus,"as"they"could"
not"foresee"a"person"dying." " " " " " " " " """""""""""
Principle:(Court"held"dolus&eventualis&existed.""
dolus%eventualis%is"a"legal"intention"with"a"legal"test."As"such"the"parties’"actual"intention"is"
irrelevant"as"the"state"is"trying"to"prevent"crime."This"test"is"most"often"used"as"it"is"seldom"possible"
to"find"the"accused"actual"intention."Is"sufficient"for"intention"(De"Bruyn)."
1) Foresight:"(
• Negligence"is"an"objective"test"traditionally"as"it"is"not"specific"to"anyone,"subjective"tests"are"
ones"that"are"related"to"the"particular"accused.(
• Fault"was"originally"a"purely"objective"test,"looking"at"the"accused"intention,"a"reasonable"person"
would"have"foreseen"&"the"accused"is"a"reasonable"person"he"must"have"foreseen"(confusing).(
• Fault"is"now"a"subjective"test,"i.e."the"mind"of"the"accused.(
• There"is"still"some"utility"in"looking"at"objective"factors,"as"the"intention"of"the"accused"cannot"
always"be"found."Objective"factors"are"used"to"determine"an"accused"subjective"intention"BUT"
objective"factors"will"only"reveal"an"accused"subjective"intention"if"the"inferences"drawn"from"
the"objective"factors"is"the"only"inference"that"can"be"drawn.(
• The"inferences"will"depend"on"the"facts"of"the"case"&"evidence,"e.g."the"type"of"weapon"used;"
seriousness"of"the"injury;"body"part"injured"are"factors"to"consider"for"foresight.(
• It"is"ok"to"used"objective"factors"to"prove"foresight"as"the"more"objectively"probable"the"death"
the"more"subjectively"probable"the"accused"foresaw"the"death.(
15"
"
no"medical"knowledge"would"not"know"the"difference"between"stabbing"a"big"or"small"man."
Principle:(in"law"a"person"intends"to"kill"if"he"deliberately"commits"an"act"which"he"appreciates"might"
result"in"death"&"acts"recklessly"as"to"if"the"death"will"result."
• NB:"thin"skull"rule"does"not"assist"in"proving"fault,"consequence"being"that"anytime"a"victim"with"
a"predcondition/susceptibility"that"could"not"have"been"foreseen"there"is"no"dolus&or"negligence."
(
2) Real(Possibility""
• Dolus&eventualis&is"already"an"extension"of"intention"as"we"understand"it"in"the"ordinary"sense"&"
that"justifies"foresight"of"a"real"possibility,"it"is"taking"intention"further"away"from"what"we"
understand"intention"in"the"ordinary"sense"to"be.""
• Real"as"opposed"to"remote"possibility"is"required,"remote"possibility"seems"to"evidence"
negligence."The"accused"must"foresee"death"as"something"that"is"more"likely"to"happen"than"not"
(R"v"Horn)."Rationale:"DE"is"already"a"‘legal’"form"of"intention"detracting"from"intent"in"the"
ordinary"sense."
3) Recklessness(
• A"person"must"act"reckless"to"the"foresight"of"a"real"possibility"of"death"e.g."A"owns"a"mine"&"he"
foresees"danger"to"his"employees"as"the"left"shaft"is"faulty,"he"get"it"repaired"but"the"next"day"a"
cable"snaps"&"some"minors"die."He"foresaw"a"real"possibility"but"did"not"act"recklessly"to"this,"he"
is"therefore"not"criminally"liable"&"there"is"no"mens&rea.""
• Other"ways"of"explaining"it"are:"“taking"the"possibility"into"the"bargain”"or"“conceding"yourself"to"
the"materialization"of"the"possibility”"or"“consciously"accepting"the"risk”"or"“don’t"allow"yourself"
to"be"deterred"by"your"foresight.”"
16"
"
• It"ties"in"with"the"requirement"of"a"real"possibility,"if"the"accused"can"only"slightly"foresee"the"
possibility"the"less"chance"you"will"act"recklessly"to"it."The"more"foreseeable"the"more"reckless"
you"will"have"to"be."
General(intention((dolus&inderterminatus)"
• Is"where"intention"is"not"necessary"in"relation"to"a"particular"person,"it"may"be"
general/indeterminate"e.g."throwing"a"bomb"into"a"crowd."The"accused"will"have"dolus&
eventualis&that"is"general"in"nature,"a"desired"goal"is"not"needed,"backdrop"of"the"other"3"tests."
Intention(v(Motive(
• Motive"(reason"for"committing"a"crime)"is"not"an"element"of"a"crime,"intention"is,"however"both"
relate"to"the"accused"state"of"mind."(
• Motive"can"evidence"the"existence"of"a"ground"of"justification."It"can"be"useful"in"sentencing"e.g."
Hartman."It"is"also"important"for"evidentiary"purposes"&"can"sometimes"lead"to"the"identity"of"
the"perpetrator."Some"motives"carry"a"higher"degree"of"blameworthiness"which"assists"in"
sentencing.(
• Motive"will"never"help"prove"criminal"liability.(
(
o NEGLIGENCE"(CULPA)(
• Is"an"objective"standard."It"is"wrongful"because"the"law"requires"a"certain"standard"of"care"&"the"
accused"is"falling"short"of"this"standard"that"is"punishable."It"is"not"inadvertence"but"rather"the"
fact"that"another"person"would"have"averted.""
• It"is"sufficient"to"prove"culpa&for"culpable"homicide,"some"instances"of"contempt"of"court,"and"
some"instances"of"statutory"crimes."
• Culpable"homicide"is"a"lesser"form"of"a"crime"than"murder;"it"is"a"competent"verdict"of"murder."If"
intention"cannot"be"proven"but"negligence"can"the"lower"sentence"can"be"held."During"
sentencing"you"have"mitigating"&"aggravating"circumstances;"it"is"therefore"possible"for"culpable"
homicide"to"serve"a"higher"sentence"than"even"murder.""
• Test(for(negligence((Kruger"v"Coetzee):"
1. Would"a"reasonable"person"in"the"circumstances"have"foreseen?"
2. Would"a"reasonable"person"in"the"circumstances"have"taken"steps"to"guard"against"the"
unlawful"event?"
3. Did"the"accused"take"these"steps?"
• Who"is"the"reasonable"man?"
17"
"
Principle:(The"reasonable"man"is"a"man"who"treads"life"pathways"with"moderate"&"prudent"common"
sense."
• There"are"certain"exceptions"to"the"rule"made"in"Mbombela"
1. If"a"person"professes"to"have"expert"knowledge,"a"higher"standard"is"required."NOTE:"a"
reasonable"person"does"not"profess"to"have"a"skill"that"they"do"not"have,"the"test"is"
therefore"still"objective.""
2. People"who"actually"have"specialized"skills/expert"knowledge"have"a"higher"standard"e.g."a"
doctor."
3. Look"at"the"actual"physical"position"of"the"accused."NOTE:"this"is"still"objective."
• The(interplay(between(dolus%&(culpa."Dolus:"the"accused"has"to"foresee"a"real"possibility"&"act"
recklessly,"when"only"a"slight"possibility"is"foreseen"it"amounts"to"negligence."Dolus&therefore"
doesn’t"exclude"the"existence"of"culpa,"just"because"A"has"dolus&doesn’t"mean"a"reasonable"man"
wouldn’t"have"foreseen"&"been"negligent.""
• Can"you"use"the"existence"of"dolus&to"argue"you"were"not"negligent?"E.g."X"is"charged"with"
murder"but"the"state"cannot"prove"intention,"only"negligence."Can"X"say"even"if"I"should"have"
foreseen"the"possibility"it"is"reasonably"possible"I"did,"thus"I"have"dolus&eventualis¬"culpa."
18"
"
• If"culpa&&"dolus&were"mutually"exclusive,"the"accused"could"raise"a"defence"that"he"intended"to"
kill"as"a"defence"against"negligence."Dolus&therefore"does"not"exclude"culpa,"both"can"exist"but"
the"higher"will"attract"liability."
• The"exceptions:"
• What"must"be"foreseen"by"A"in"order"to"be"liable"for"CH?"Usually"people"cause"culpable"
homicide"through"assault,"there"is"therefore"intention."3"different"judges"with"different"views:"
19"
"
AJ(Rump:(as"long"as"there"is"some"bodily"injury"that"is"foreseeable"then"death"is"always"foreseeable,"
a"normal"person"should"foresee"a"minor"assault"could"have"extraordinary"consequences.""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Foresight"is"difficult"to"determine."
• Homes’s"statement"would"not"always"hold"true,"e.g."a"broken"leg"is"a"serious"injury"but"not"
necessarily"life"threatening."
CULPA( DOLUS(EVENTUALIS(
1)Would"a"reasonable"man"have"foreseen?" 1)Foresight"is"the"only"inference."
2)Would"a"reasonable"man"have"taken"steps"to" 2)Real"possibility"of"death."
guard"against?"
3)Did"the"accused"take"steps?" 3)Act"reckless"to"this"knowledge."
"
MISTAKE)
• Fault"is"either"douls/culpa&but"it"can"be"negated/excluded"through"2"principles."
1) Mens&rea&must"extend"to"every"element"of"a"crime,"if"it"doesn’t"="no"crime."Actus&rues&&"
mens&rea&must"coincide"(contemporaneous)"‘try"prove"negligence"at"time"of"death’"
20"
"
2) By"way"of"mistake"to"negate"fault.""
• Where"a"person"was"voluntary"&"fulfils"the"requirements"of"the"fault"of"a"crime"he"can"still"
negate"it"by"making"a"mistake"that"did"not"allow"him"to"foresee"a"real"possibility."
• There"will"be"no"mens&rea"if:"
1. A"does"not"appreciate"that"he"is"killing"a"human."E.g."A"shoots"&"kills"B,"thinking"he"is"B’s"
dog."A"makes"a"mistake"of"fact"that"prevents"foresight.""
2. If"A"doesn’t"appreciate"that"his"act"will"cause"death"(mistake"of"law)."
3. If"A"doesn’t"appreciate"the"killing"is"unlawful"in"the"circumstances"(mistake"of"fact)."
(
o Mistake"of"fact:(
• Does"the"mistake"prevent"A"from"intention"extending"to"every"element"of"the"crime?"E.g."A"takes"
a"coat"leaving"a"party"that"looks"much"like"his"own"&"he"thinks"is"his"own,"he"thinks"it"is"his"own"
therefore"he"doesn’t"intend"to"take"another’s"property"(the"essential"element"of"theft)."
• Is"A’s"mistake"such"as"to"‘exclude"the"foresight"of"the"possibility"of"the"crime?’"Which"element"of"
the"crime"does"it"negate?"
• If"the"crime"is"one"that"requires"culpa&the"question"is,"whether"reasonable"man"in"the"accused"
circumstances"have"foreseen"the"unlawful"consequence"despite"the"mistake."For"instance"in"the"
case"of"Mbombela"the"mistake"could"not"have"prevented"a"reasonable"person"form"having"
foreseen"that"it"may"have"not"been"an"evil"spirit."
• Reasonableness"of"the"mistake"(De"Blom)"
(
o Abberatio&Ictus:(
• Means"‘going"astray"of"the"blow,’"i.e."the"consequences"are"different"to"what"the"accused"
expected."E.g."A"wishing"to"kill"B"misses"B"and"instead"kills"C.(
• There"will"be"full"intention"unlike"mistake,"as"the"accused"is"not"mistaken"by"their"victim.(
• This"is"not"a"legal"rule,"it"merely"describes"a"situation."It"cannot"therefore"negate"fault,"it"is"only"a"
method"of"alerting"one"to"the"fact"that"fault"is"an"issue.(
• 2"approaches:"before"&"after"the"vesari&doctrine"(Bernardus).(
PreU1965:(Doctrine(of(transferred(malice:(
21"
"
having"to"prove"specific"intention."" " " " " """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Through"the"doctrine"of"transferred"malice"the"A"is"guilty."
PostU1965:(Concrete(intent(approach:(unlike"general"principles"of"fault"to"establish"if"there"was"fault"
in"respect"of"the"actual"victim."
o Mistake"of"law:(
• Is"made"when"an"accused"thinks"the"law"is"something"that"it"isn’t"or"when"an"accused"claims"
they"do"not"know"the"law."Mens&rea&must"extend"to"every"element"of"the"crime"so"if"you"cannot"
foresee"the"unlawfulness"as"you"do"not"know"the"law"this"is"not"possible."
• For"exam"purposes"there"will"always"be"a"legal"provision"&"the"facts"will"be"different."
• In"the"past"ignorance"of"the"law"was"never"an"excuse"&"everyone"was"presumed"to"know"the"
law."
• In"1977"the"case"of"‘De"Blom’"changed"this"&"did"away"with"policy"decisions"in"this"area."
22"
"
possibility)"is"an"essential"element"of"a"crime,"there"is"no"punishment"in"law"without"a"crime,"a"
person"must"therefore"be"fully"valid"of"the"illegality"before"they"can"be"liable."They"are"not"saying"
the"accused"must"know"the"relevant"statute"&"section"of"contravention"or"that"what"the"accused"is"
doing"is"a"crime."The"accused"must"simply"know"what"they"are"doing"could"be"unlawful."In"order"to"
have"a"conviction"the"accused"must"have"realized"what"he"intends"to"do"could"be"unlawful"&"
reconciles"himself"to"that"possibility."In"terms"of"the"money"the"accused"knew"she"needed"
permission"to"take"it"out,"that"is"the"only"inference"that"could"be"made"on"the"facts"such"as"her"
hiding"the"money;"she"had"travelled"extensively,"her"inconsistent"replies"to"the"police"&"court."Her"
mistake"therefore"did"not"prevent"her"from"foreseeing"that"she"was"doing"something"unlawful."The"
jewellery"however,"the"court"held,"she"wore"more"than"the"average"woman,"she"had"taken"jewellery"
out"of"the"country"before"&"always"returned"with"it"&"on"this"basis"she"didn’t"foresee"the"
unlawfulness." " " " " " " " " " """""""""""""""""
Principle:(If"a"person"does"not"intend"to"act"unlawfully"they"cannot"be"liable,"as"it"does"not"extend"to"
every"element"of"the"crime."
• From"‘De"Blom’"we"can"see"that"a"bona&fide&mistake"of"law"can"exclude"intention"even"if"it"is"
unreasonable,"but"it"cannot"negate"negligence"that"the"accused"reasonably"made"the"error."Look"
at"objective"factors"against"the"alleged"‘lack"of"knowledge.’"
• Dolus:"The"accused"mistake"of"law"prevented"him"from"having"foresight"of"the"real"possibility"
that"the"thing"he"is"doing"is"wrongful/unlawful."“knowledge"of"the"unlawful"consequence”"
• Culpa:"The"accused"mistake"of"law"must"prevent"a"reasonable"person"from"having"foreseen"of"
the"possibility"that"the"thing"he"is"doing"is"wrongful/unlawful."“mistake"is"reasonable”"
• A"person"working"in"a"particular"sphere"(had"a"particular"knowledge)"should"know"the"rules"
(cannot"say"they"don’t"know)"within"their"sphere."
• Reliance"on"legal"advice."
23"
"
Case:"S"v"Longdistance"1990" " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:"Mistake"of"law"with"reliance"on"legal"advice,"&"in"a"specialized"field."(( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"was"charged"with"transporting"goods"illegally"after"relying"on"an"advocate’s"advice."Held"
that"legal"advice"has"no"magic"which"justifies"the"recipient"from"using"his"own"common"sense."On"
the"facts"the"lawyer’s"advice"was"so"bizarre"even"the"most"unintelligent"person"would"have"thought"
to"seek"advice"elsewhere."Further"A"had"received"further"warning"signals"as"he"had"been"stopped"
before"&"charged"with"the"same"offence."Since"A"was"engaged"in"a"specialized"field"it"was"their"duty"
to"acquaint"themselves"with"the"law."" " " " " " " " """""""""""""""
Principle:(Relying"on"one"lawyer’s"advice"is"not"sufficient"to"negate"negligence."
o Statutory"mens&rea:(
• Statute"will"indicate"the"kind"of"fault"needed,"if"it"doesn’t"you"must"determine"the"form"of"mens&
rea&needed"from"the"statute."
• In"the"past"strict"liability"was"needed"(predvesari)"&"the"courts"didn’t"look"to"prove"fault."
• Today"(postdvesari)"we"cannot"assume"any"fault"is"sufficient,"we"assume"that"the"statute"did"
intend"some"form"of"mens&rea"to"exist."
• The"rules"for"determining"the"statutes"intent"are:"
1. Look"at"the"wording"of"the"statute."Willingly,"knowingly,"fraudulently,"ect."indicate"dolus.""
2. Look"at"the"language"used"in"the"clause."
3. Look"at"the"scope"&"object"of"the"clause:"the"higher"the"degree"of"harm,"the"lower"the"
degree"of"fault"as"courts"want"to"convict"criminals."
4. Look"at"the"nature"&"extent"of"punishment:"the"more"punishable"a"crime"the"more"fault"will"
be"needed"(dolus)"as"the"courts"favour"liberty."
24"
"
CAPACITY)invaluable))
• Is"negated"through"either"intoxication"or"provocation"(these"can"serve"to"negate"capacity,"
voluntariness"&"fault)."Everyone"is"presumed"to"have"capacity,"except"children"under"7,"the"onus"
is"on"the"accused"to"prove"their"incapacity."
• It"is"a"two"step"process"that"is"used"to"negate"capacity:"
a) Can"the"accused"appreciate"the"difference"between"right"&"wrong"(subjectively)."
b) Was"the"accused"able"to"act"in"accordance"with"that"appreciation?"
• Voluntariness:"the"ability"to"subject"ones"bodily"movements"to"ones"conscious"will."
• Intention:"Foresight"of"a"real"possibility"of"death/harm"&"acting"recklessly"to"that"knowledge."
"
o Intoxication:"
• Can"negate"either"the"(a)"or"(b)"requirement."
• Involuntary"acts,"i.e."a"substance"is"given"without"A’s"knowledge/consent,"must"be"distinguished"
from"voluntary"acts,"i.e."taking"the"substance"yourself."
• Voluntariness"is"a"higher"degree"of"blameworthiness."
• Links"to"antecedent"liability,"if"you"had"a"prior"knowledge"before"the"state,"then"the"prosecution"
can"prove"voluntariness."
• Voluntariness"is"divided"into"the"law"prior"to"1981"&"post"1981"in"accordance"with"the"Criminal"
Law"Amendment"Act."
• Prior"to"1981:"the"general"rule"was"that"liability"couldn’t"be"wholly"negated"by"intoxication."
There"was"use"of"ordinary"intent"crimes"that"sufficed"with"negligence."Therefore"one"could"get"a"
lower"crime"if"drunk"e.g."culpable"homicide"not"murder."Strong"policy"approach."
• S"v"Johnston"(see"in"voluntariness"section)"the"A"lacked"specific"intent,"but"this"term"was"not"
clearly"defined"(NOT"clear"criminal"principles).""
• R"v"Bourke"1916"“it"would"be"repulsive"to"the"community"at"large"to"give"a"drunken"person"
protection"under"the"law.”"
• Post"1981:"S"v"Chretein"(see"in"voluntariness"section)"A"alleged"that"he"lacked"fault,"he"believed"
that"the"people"would"move"out"of"the"way"&"that"he"was"far"enough"away"to"miss"them."Held"
that"it"was"possible"that"A"didn’t"see"the"possibility"the"people"would"move"out"of"the"way."He"
was"not"held"for"murder,"attempted"murder"(as"these"require"dolus)"&"assault"(there"is"no"
negligent"assault).""Held"there"can"be"no"conviction"on"any"crime"with"dolus."A"was"liable"for"1"
count"of"culpable"homicide."
• Chretein"tells"us"that"intoxication"can"negate"capacity,"voluntariness"&"fault."
• Culpa:"cannot"take"drunkenness"into"account"as"a"reasonable"man"knows"when"to"stop."
Intoxication"can"therefore"never"negate"negligence."
• Criminal"Law"Amendment"Act"S1(1):"was"created"in"response"to"Chretein"as"drunkards"can"
escape"liability."It"made"it"an"offence"to"use"lack"of"capacity"as"a"defence"for"intoxication."The"
elements"for"the"crime"are:"
25"
"
1. Consumption"of"any"intoxicating"substance"by"A."
2. A’s"faculties"must"be"impaired"as"a"result,"i.e."he"cannot"appreciate"right/wrong"or"cannot"
act"in"accordance"with"this."
3. There"must"be"knowledge"that"the"substance"affects"faculties."
4. The"commission"of"an"offence"of"A"in"law."
5. A"would"in"normal"course"of"events"not"be"criminally"liable"under"the"common"law"due"to"
the"impaired"faculties."
• i.e."the"act"makes"it"so"that"if"you"would"be"acquitted"under"the"common"law"due"to"lack"of"
capacity,"you"will"receive"the"same"charge"you"would"have"anyway."
• Note:"under"this"act"Chretein"would"NOT"have"been"liable"as"he"didn’t"use"capacity"as"a"defence."
• The"best"defence"for"a"drunk"A"is"therefore"fault."
"
"
"
o Provocation"(severe"emotional"stress)"
• One"could"not"try"disproving"intention"using"provocation"as"it"shows"intention"rather"than"
negates"it."Voluntariness"would"also"be"difficult"to"negate"as"you"would"have"to"prove"you"are"a"
similar"state"to"‘dead"drunk.’"Capacity"is"therefore"most"important"defence"of"provocation."
• Provocation"is"an"act/insult"of"such"as"serious"nature"that"it"can"deprive"a"person"of"their"
ordinary"power"of"self"control."It"can"arise"from"extreme"stress"caused"by"anger,"fear"ect."
• In"the"past"the"courts"used"the"‘separate"doctrine"approach,’"&"was"not"seen"as"a"part"of"criminal"
law,"i.e."it"had"not"general"criminal"law"principles."A"would"be"held"from"crimes"requiring"
ordinary"intent,"i.e."they"would"get"lower"crimes."Provocation"could"never"be"a"full"defence,"but"
this"changed"after"Chretein."
• Today"we"used"the"general"principles"doctrine,"using"the"principles"of"capacity,"voluntariness"&"
intention."
26"
"
in"accordance"with"the"knowledge"of"right/wrong."Accused"acquitted." " " """"""""""""""""
Criticism:("The"court"too"readily"accepted"A’s"testimony"&"his"say"so"“ipse&dixit.”" " """"""""""""""
Principle:(One"may"lack"capacity"by"means"of"provocation."
• Provocation"is"a"question"of"fact/a"state"of"affairs."
• Should"the"law"allow"self"help?"The"more"subjective"the"test"the"more"likely"hotdheaded"people"
will"be"rewarded"for"their"hotdheadedness."The"law"is"meant"to"prevent"not"justify"the"crime."
27"
"
announced"he"had"AIDS."A"got"angry"&"attacked"the"deceased"with"an"ornament;"he"then"ran"to"the"
kitchen"picking"up"a"knife"&"stabbed"the"deceased."He"runs"back"to"the"kitchen"and"grabs"a"bigger"
knife"&"slits"the"deceased’s"wrists"&"throat."A"alleged"he"knew"that"he"was"doing"but"couldn’t"stop"
himself."A"had"also"tried"to"remove"fingerprints"from"the"ornament"&"clean"the"blood"stains,"he"then"
picked"up"a"hitchdhiker"to"try"create"an"alibi"by"seducing"him."Physiologists"didn’t"discredit"that"A"had"
acted"in"a"sane"automatic"state"at"the"time,"A"found"not"guilty.""""""""""""""" "" " """""""""""""""""
Principle:(It"is"possible"for"provocation"to"achieve"acquittal."
• Eadie"adds"an"objective"element"of"the"surrounding"circumstances"to"a"subjective"test."
JUNE(EXAM(2011(
UNLAWFULNESS)
• Unlawfulness"is"a"concept"that"embraces"disproving"judgement"of"an"act"by"the"law.""
• This"element"relates"to"whether"conduct,"causation"or"voluntariness"is"justifiable."The"question"is"
whether"the"accused"that"has"satisfied"the"elements"of"a"crime"was"justified"in"doing"so?"
• "In"practice"the"state"will"not"try"prove"this,"it"will"simply"be"inferred"&"assumed"from"inferences"
as"it"is"generally"prime"farce"unlawful"to"commit"a"crime."The"courts"will"make"a"value"judgement"
of"unlawfulness"after"looking"at"the"facts.""
• Grounds"of"justification"(GOJ)"are"accepted"defences"to"having"committed"a"crime,"which"can"
negate"unlawfulness,"this"is"an"objective"test"which"looks"at"the"circumstances"&"objective"factors"
in"the"accused"position.""
• Defences"negating"Mens&Rea"can"be"limited"if"the"crime"is"a"strict"liability"crime"(fault)"i.e"if"mens&
rea"isn’t"required"in"the"first"place,"that"in"itself"excludes"the"possibility"of"any"possible"defence."
• "There"is"never"a"crime"that"doesn’t"require"unlawfulness"&"one"is"never"prevented"from"raising"a"
GOJ."GOJ"only"go"towards"negating"unlawfulness"not"either"form"of"mens&rea."
28"
"
• The"state"bares"the"onus"to"prove"every"element"of"the"crime,"the"accused"however"has"a"
evidentiary"burden"to"adduce"some"kind"of"evidence"for"a"GOJ,"on"a"balance"of"probability."After"
this"the"state"must"disprove,"beyond"a"reasonable"doubt,"the"GOJ."
Grounds(of(Justification"
1. Private(Defence(
• Is"a"holistic/broad"concept,"it"encapsulates"the"narrow"concept"of"self,"property"and"
defence"of"another."
• Where"X"is"faced"with"an"imminent"attack"
upon"a"legally"protected"interest"&"that" DEFENCE(
attack"upon"X"is"unlawful,"X"acts"against"the"
attack"reasonably"against"the"attacker"&" 1) Necessary."
does"whatever"is"necessary"to"avert"the" 2) Reasonable"(proportional)."
h ATTACK(
a 3) Directed"at"the"attacker."
r 1) Imminence,"the"attack"must"have"
4) A"must"prove"he"was"acting"in"
m begun"but"not"be"completed.""
private"defence."
." "
2) There"has"to"be"a"legally"protected" • NB"this"is"an"OBJECTIVE"test."
interest."
""" 3) Attack"must"be"unlawful."
" "
"
"
"
"
o ATTACK(
Imminence"
• An"attack"must"have"begun"&"not"yet"complete"or"be"imminent."Generally"when"an"attack"is"
anticipated"predemptive"attack"is"not"necessary,"likewise"if"the"attack"is"complete"&"defensive"
steps"are"taken"(revenge/retaliation)"a"defence"cannot"be"raised.""
29"
"
• Fear"alone"is"not"sufficient,"an"actual"attack"must"have"commenced"(Patel)."This"means"there"
must"be"reasonable"grounds"for"believing"that"there"is"an"imminent"attack,"subjective"fear"is"
insufficient."
• Imminence"is"divided"into"self"defence"&"private"defence"(defence"of"property).""
• Defence(of(property:"generally"one"may"use"deadly"force"to"protect"their"property/interest"in"
property,"if"the"thief"is"running"away"they"may"use"force"to"apprehend"them."One"may"use"force"
to"prevent"damage"to"ones"property."
• If"the"attack"is"complete,"the"conduct"amounts"to"retaliation,"exception:"
30"
"
Trespassing"is"not"sufficient"to"use"deadly"force."Courts"will"punish"socially"reprehensible"behaviour,"
even"if"on"a"lower"sentence.""
• Imminence"in"relation"to"self"defence."
• Battered(Woman(Syndrome:(where"a"person"eventually"‘snaps.’"There"is"no"imminent"attack.(
• Is"private"defence"able"to"be"used"then"for"an"attack"that"is"not"imminent?(
• Provocation"is"a"better"defence,"however"objective"evidence"is"required"(Eadie)"with"cannot"
always"be"found.(
Against(a(Legally(Protected(Interest(
• An"interest"protected"by"law"i.e."life"&"limb,"property,"3rd"party"(even"without"a"special"
relationship).(
Unlawful(
• The"attack"on"the"accused"must"be"objectively"unlawful"to"trigger"defensive"steps.(
31"
"
• Putative(private(defence:(Where"objectively"speaking"there"was"no"imminent/unlawful"attack"
but"the"accused"genuinely"thought"there"was."This"is"similar"to"mistake"of"fact,"it"goes"towards"
negating"INTENTION."The"accused"therefore"argues"they"didn’t"intend"to"act"unlawfully.(
• What"if"objectively"the"element"don’t"exist"but"are"perceived"to,""then"the"defendant"cannot"
rely"on"private"defence,"therefore"unlawfulness"is"proven"as"any"defensive"steps"taken"are"
unlawful."Putative"private"defence"goes"towards"negating"culpability"(dolus/culpa)"not"
unlawfulness."If"dolus"doesn’t"exist"then"liability"as"a"whole"is"excluded."
32"
"
o DEFENCE((
Necessary("
• No"other"means"available,"cant"ward"off"in"any"other"way"(Patel)(Van"Wyk)."
• If"you"have"to"react"in"the"only"means"available,"is"the"victim"obliged"to"retreat"if"they"can?"
• If"an"attack"can"be"avoided"by"escape/retreat"the"law"may"require"the"accused"to"retreat"only"if"
a"safe"escape"can"be"guaranteed,"without"risking"a"blow"to"the"back."
Reasonableness((Proportionality)(
• When"defending"property,"proportionality"between"property"&"the"nature"of"interest"impaired"
is"not"needed"(Van"Wyk)."
• Self"defence"must"have"a"rough"approximation"between"the"gravity"of"the"attack"and"the"style"
&"nature"of"the"defence."
• You"must"establish"what"is"reasonable"in"the"circumstances."
33"
"
Facts:(G"went"to"X’s"house"to"gamble,"during"which"G"experienced"heavy"losses."X"eventually"asked"
for"a"‘free"call’"to"recoup"his"losses"but"was"refused,"an"altercation"ensued."Friends"of"X"held"that"G"
accosted"X""&"drew"a"firearm,"X"then"drew"his"firearm"&"G"shot"him,"G"then"picked"up"X’s"weapon"&"
shot"him"in"the"mouth."G"alleged"that"he"was"trying"to"leave"the"premises"when"X"accosted"him,"&"
drew"his"gun"causing"G"to"shoot"to"protect"himself"(self"defence)."G’s"story"was"the"more"creditable,"
&"court"held"the"other"version"was"unconvincing,"but"G"must"still"act"reasonably."G"was"justified"in"
defending"himself"by"shooting"1"or"more"times"provided"it"is"reasonable,"evidence"showed"at"some"
point"X"fell"down,"the"shot"from"X’s"weapon"to"the"mouth"was"not"justified,"G"held"guilty.""""""""
Principle:(The"attacked"may"become"the"attacker,"force"after"initial"attack"="exceeding"bounds"of"
defence."
• Directed"at"attacker"&"awareness"of"self"defence"will"not"be"discussed"further.""
"
2. Necessity(
• This"is"an"objective"test."
• It"permits"a"person"who"in"order"to"avoid"harm"in"certain"circumstances"to"commit"what"would"
otherwise"be"a"crime."I.e."where"a"person"is"faced"with"2"evils"in"an"emergency"&"chooses"the"
lesser"of"the"2,"&"breaks"the"law"to"do"this.""
• Define:(A"person"acts"in"necessity"if"they"act"in"their/another’s"legal"interest"which"is"
endangered"by"an"imminent"threat"&"cannot"be"avoided"in"any"other"way,"provided"they"are"
not"required"to"endure"the"danger"&"the"interest"protected"is"not"out"of"proportion"to"the"
illegal"act.""
• Elements:((1)Danger"to"a"legally"protected"interest" " " " " "
" " 2)"Endangered"by"a"threat"(imminent/commenced)" " `" "
" " 3)Not"caused"by"A’s"fault"" " " " " " "
" " 4)"Which"A"is"not"obliged"to"endure" " " " " "
" " 5)"Which"was"necessary"to"avert"danger"" " " " "
" " 6)"Means"used"are"reasonable"in"the"circumstances(
• Agency:(either"by"nonhuman"factors"e.g."emergency"or"by"human"factor"e.g."duress/compulsion(
• Similarities"to"Private"defence."(i)"Both"serve"to"make"otherwise"unlawful"acts"lawful,"(ii)"
resorted"to"protect"legally"recognised"interests,"(iii)"both"require"their"dangers"to"be"imminent,"
(iv)"must"be"reasonable/necessary,"(v)"must"act"in"proportion."
• Differences"from"private"defence:"
Necessity( Private(Defence(
Evil"to"self"&"evil"to"another" Evil"to"self"&"evil"to"an"unlawful"attacker"
No"attack"required,"threat"is"sufficient"" An"imminent"attack"is"required"
Can"be"human"or"nonhuman" Must"be"a"human"attack"
Directed"at"an"innocent"party" Directed"at"the"attacker"
1)"Danger"to"a"legally"protected"interest"
34"
"
moved"into"a"white"area"&"argued"it"was"a"necessity"as"this"place"was"cheaper"than"where"he"was"
designated"to"live."Again"the"court"held"economic"necessity"could"not"apply."" " """"""""""""""""""
Principle:(Economic"necessity"cannot"contravene"a"rule"of"law.""
• Life"&"limb,"bodily"injury"&"property"could"all"be"protectable"interests"under"this"area."
2)"Endangered"by"a"threat"(imminent/commenced)"
• No"attack"is"required,"generally"a"threat"that"is"imminent"is"established"on"how"probable"it"is"
that"the"threat"will"be"realized."
• Battered"woman"syndrome:"to"argue"necessity"they"should"first"go"to"the"police,"even"if"
unsuccessful"before"imminence"is"fulfilled."
3)"Not"caused"by"the"A’s"fault"
35"
"
4)"Which"A"is"not"obliged"to"endure"
• So"far"we"have"learnt"economic"hardship"must"be"endured"(Adams)("Canestra),"&"a"situation"
which"you"created"must"be"endured"(Bradbury),"&"people"cannot"avert"danger"inherent"in"their"
duty"e.g."firemen/police/soldiers"(Kibi)."
5)"Which"was"necessary"to"avert"danger""
• Killing"for"necessity"must"be"reasonable"in"the"circumstances,"i.e."where"the"protected"interest"
>"the"interest"infringed."However"when"people"kill"it"seems"these"two"interests"are"equal.""
3. Consent(
• Generally"harm"is"not"done"to"one"who"consents"(volenti&non&fit&injuria)"i.e."there"is"no"crime."
Certain"forms"of"consent"are"recognised."
1) Living"Will:"While"a"person"is"alive"they"may"sign"a"document"that"states"that"if"you"are"in"a"
vegetative"state"with"NO"PROSPECT"of"recovering"you"will"not"be"kept"alive"unnaturally"(not"
euthanasia"as"you"are"simply"letting"nature"take"its"course)."
• Courts"will"allow"euthanasia"only"where"there"is"no"positive"conduct"(Hartman)"but"nature"takes"
its"course.""
36"
"
2) Refusal"of"medical"treatment:"Even"if"it"may"hasten"death"(Blaue)."High"court"as"upper"guardian"
of"children"can"be"approached"in"children"related"matters."
3) Consent"to"sport"involving"assault:"Only"lawful"sport"can"be"excused."Consent"extends"only"to"
what"is"reasonably"expected"in"that"sport,"anything"that"exceeds"this"will"not"be"consented"to."
You"may"consent"to"legal"medical"treatment"assault"(Stoffberg"v"Elliot)."
• Sexual"aggression"(indecent"assault)."
• In"Brown"the"minority"held"the"state"should"not"interfere"with"peoples"personal"lives"&"should"
not"engage"in"questions"of"private"morality."Is"there"harm"to"society?""
• Consent"in"the"workplace."
• 1st"question:"Is"there"consent?"
37"
"
recognise"this"consent"due"to"unequal"bargaining"powers,"the"state"has"an"obligation"to"society"&"
cannot"sanction"this." " " " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""
Principle:(Unequal"bargaining"power"may"lead"to"a"lack"of"consent.""
• 2nd"question:"Is"the"consent"real?"
• Victims"consent"must"be"given"voluntarily/without"coercion,"they"must"be"aware"of"all"material"
facts."Often"with"no"real"consent"i.e."fraud,"2"forms"of"mistake"exist"error&in&negotio"(mistake"as"
to"nature"of"conduct"they"consent"to),"error&in&persona&(mistake"in"identity"of"person).""
• "error&in&negotio:"
• Submission"is"no"longer"a"justification"to"amount"to"consent"i.e."there"doesn’t"have"to"be"
evidence"of"a"struggle"(but"it"does"help"to"prove"it).""
• Fraud"extends"to"both"active"misrepresentation"&"nonddisclosure.""
• In"most"cases"if"the"accused"believed"there"was"consent"but"a"reasonable"person"wouldn’t,"if"
the"crime"allows"the"sentence"may"be"lessened."
• 3rd"question:"Was"the"person"able"to"validly"accept?"
• I.e."able"to"understand"actions"&"material"terms,"appreciate"consequences."They"can’t"be"
young/drunk/mentally"ill/unconscious/depressed"ect.""
Degrees(of(Participation(in(a(Crime(
• Looks"at"who"committed"the"crime,"it"serves"to"find"the"kind"of"liability"of"the"accused."Varying"
degrees"may"have"different"sentences"&"consequences"e.g."murder"v"accessory"to"murder."It"is"
possible"a"lesser"crime""gets"a"higher"sentence."""
"
Degree"of"
" Participatio
( n"
Involved" Involved"
" Before" After"
Completion" Completion"
" Perpetrators" Accessories"
" or"Principles" or"
Accomplices"
"
Personal" Imputatio
" n"
• Agency"principle:"He"who"commits"an"act"through"another"commits"the"act"himself"e.g."hitman."
38"
"
• People"involved"after"the"crime"are"accessories"after"the"fact.""
• Principles"fulfil"all"the"elements"of"the"crime"while"accessories"facilitate/assist"in"completion"of"
the"crime."This"will"change"depending"on"the"facts"e.g."A"gives"B"an"iron"bar"knowing"that"B"
intends"to"steal"from"a"shop,"B"is"a"principle"for"theft"A"is"an"accessory."E.g.2."A"knowingly"gives"
B"an"iron"bar"to"kill"C,"both"B"&"A"are"principles."
• Personal"means"that"the"accused"fulfils"all"the"elements"of"the"crime."Imputation"means"they"
don’t"fulfil"these"requirements"but"conduct"&"causation"are"imputed"by"common"purpose"or"
agency."
• Common(purpose:(is"divided"into"prior"conduct"(prior"to"unlawful"act"you"agree"to"it"&"its"
consequences,"even"if"your"role"is"small"you"can"be"liable)"&"active"association"(allows"the"court"
to"impute"causation"&"conduct"to"members"of"a"group"if"1"person"in"the"group"is"guilty).""
• i.e."either"personal,"as"an"agent"of"the"crime"of"through"common"purpose."
• Accessories(further"the"commission"of"a"crime"i.e."advise/assist/encourage/make"possible."This"
must"be"done"knowingly"(dolus&eventualis)"&"cannot"exist"without"perpetrator"liability,"i.e"you"
must"first"prove"a"crime"occurred."((
• Accomplices:"(1)"Must"perform"some"unlawful"conduct"(no"G.O.J."&"not"forced)."(2)"There"must"
be"a"causal"link"between"their"conduct"&"that"of"the"principle"(even"knowledge)."(3)"Must"
further"the"commission"of"a"crime"(positive"or"negative)."Some"omissions"never"amount"to"this"
e.g."failure"to"report"a"crime/knowledge"of"a"crime"or"being"a"passive"spectator."(4)"
Intention/knowledge"must"be"to"further"the"crime"(dolus&eventualis),"this"cannot"be"negligent"
the"assistance"must"be"willingly"given,"no"requirement"the"accomplice"knows"the"principle.(
• Common(Purpose:"This"is"where"2"or"more"people"agree"to"commit"a"crime/act"in"a"joint"
enterprise,"each"will"be"responsible"for"the"specific"conduct"of"either"of"them"(provided"the"
conduct"falls"within"their"common"design).(
• 3(Requirments:"(1)(Agreement/Active"association,"(2)(Common"design,"(3)(Commission"of"a"
crime."If"all"3"are"met"a"person"is"a"perpetrator"by"imputation,"the"only"exception"is"that"each"
individual"mens&rea&must"exist"individually,"to"do"this"we"use"objective"factors"to"make"
subjective"inferences"(Sigwala)(Mini).(
(1) Mandate/Prior(Agreement:"Common"purpose"only"applies"within"the"agreed"purpose"of"the"
crime,"this"is"determine"by"dolus&eventualis."i.e."if"the"criminal"could"foresee"the"real"possibility"
of"the"unexpected"crime,"it"doesn’t"matter"if"they"stated"it"won’t"happen."(
• Even"a"minor"role"suffices,"presence"at"the"scene"is"not"required,"imputation"can"only"occur"if"
the"personal"perpetrators"act"falls"within"the"foreseeable"mandate"(express/implied/tacit).(
• It"is"not"possible"for"an"accused"to"dissociate"from"the"common"purpose"on"the"basis"that"the"
mandate"was"limited"(basis"of"dolus&eventualis).""
39"
"
(2) Active(Association:(
• Normally"involves"a"crowd/mob,"the"only"requirement"is"a"common"objective"(no"prior"
agreement).(
• Fault"in"common"purpose"must"be"addressed"individually."But"when"must"fault"be"assessed?"
Can"one"disassociate"from"the"common"purpose?"
40"
"
with"a"gun,"it"was"simply"a"result"of"the"struggle."Next"the"court"looked"at"if"intention"should"be"
assessed"at"the"time"of"planning"or"time"of"the"act."Held"it"must"be"when"the"common"purpose"
arose"(i.e."a"person"who"plans"to"do"something"cannot"change"their"mind"later),"culpable"homicide"
confirmed."Minority"held"the"critical"time"for"assessing"is"during"perpetration"of"the"act.""""""""""""
Principle:(Intention"should"be"assessed"when"the"common"purpose"arose."
• When"can"someone"disassociate"from"the"common"purpose?"For"active"association"this"is"easy"
as"presence"is"needed,"therefore"just"stay"away."
• This"means"not"showing"up"is"not"sufficient"as"presence"is"not"a"requirement,"there"must"be"
positive"conduct"in"some"form"e.g."going"to"the"police.""
• The"withdrawal"must"be"voluntary"it"cannot"be"as"a"result"of"the"police"or"someone"finding"out,"
some"kind"of"act"must"happen"to"try"stop"the"common"purpose."Withdrawal"is"only"effective"
before"the"“commencement"of"execution”"which"depends"on"the"crime"&"circumstances"of"
each"case.""
• Withdrawal(from(Common(purpose:(a"positive"act"is"needed"(try"to"stop),"but"the"time"when"
withdrawal"is"assessed"is"an"issue."(
• In"order"to"disassociate"from"the"common"purpose"A"must"notify"their"codconspirators"they"will"
not"take"part."However"if"your"participation"is"already"substantial"then"something"more"is"
needed"i.e."positive"conduct"(S"v"Beahan"1992)."
• Joiner(in(liability:(is"where"A,"who"intends"to"kill,"joins"an"attack"which"has"commenced"after"
the"mortal"blow"has"been"struck"(they"hasten"death)."According"to"this"the"Mgadezi"
requirements"are"fulfilled"&"conduct"cannot"be"imputed"after"the"fact,"they"are"a"second"entity."
These"people"are"liable"for"attempted"murder"(as"attempts"to"commit"the"impossible"are"
recognised),"unless"they"join"before"the"mortal"blow"(active"association)"&"if"they"hasten"death"
they"will"be"a"personal"perpetrator."
41"
"
murder"arises"only"when"one"dies,"on"the"other"M"can’t"be"liable"as"he"didn’t"cause"death"(NCI)."
Held"M"was"liable"for"attempted"murder"but"this"doesn’t"mean"a"smaller"sentence"has"to"be"given."
Principle:(Application"of"joiner"in"liability."
Attempts(
• An"attempt"to"commit"a"crime"is"a"crime"in"itself."This"aims"to"find"a"criterion,"i.e."to"evaluate"at"
what"stage"of"the"act"sufficed"as"an"attempt,"at"what"stage"is"the"act"attempted.""
• Note:"A"completed"attempt"is"one"where"A"has"done"all"they"set"out"to"do"but"by"some"external"
agency"(nature/skill/another)"they"fail."An"incomplete"attempt"is"where"A"didn’t"do"all"they"set"
out"2"i.e."they"were"stopped"by"something"(link"to"disassociation)."There"is"an"argument"that"an"
attempt"is"an"attempt"&"there"shouldn’t"be"a"differentiation.""
• Does"the"law"allow"for"a"change"of"mind?"Hlatwayo"held"that"only"a"voluntary"change"of"mind"
before"the"beginning"of"the"end"will"suffice"as"a"change,"after"this"point"will"not."Snyman"argues"
that"any"change"of"mind"is"sufficient"as"the"aims"of"deterrence"&"prevention"have"already"
happened"&"therefore"the"mens&rea&&"actus&reus"don’t"coincide.""
• Can"one"attempt"to"commit"an"impossible"act?"
42"
"
Facts:(Abortion"was"illegal"&"D"has"personally"aborted"her"child,"however"evidence"showed"the"child"
was"already"dead."Held"D"was"liable"for"attempted"murder."" " " " """"""""""
Principle:(It"is"possible"to"try"attempting"to"commit"the"impossible,"as"the"law"tries"to"prevent"
crimes"from"happening"&"one"cannot"be"absolved"due"to"some"luck.""
• This"above"rule"is"subject"to"the"fact"that"if"A"is"attempting"to"commit"an"aim"that"isn’t"a"crime"
they"can’t"be"liable."Note"the"Davies"rule"means"if"A"shoots"a"scarecrow"thinking"it"is"a"human"&"
intends"to"kill"they"are"liable.""
Rape(
• Originally"rape"was"the"‘unlawful,"intentional"sexual"intercourse"with"a"woman"without"consent’"
i.e."men"weren’t"included"and"this"only"extended"to"vaginal"entry.""
• (1)"Unlawfulness:"presumed"unless"a"G.O.J"existed"(most"common"was"consent)."It"wasn’t"
possible"for"a"man"to"rape"their"wife"(changed"with"the"prevention"of"family"violence"act),"&"a"
boy"under"14"was"presumed"incapable"to"have"sex"&"therefore"couldn’t"rape"(changed"with"
criminal"evidence"&"procedure"act).""
• (2)"Sexual"intercourse"with"a"woman:"only"extended"to"a"penis"into"a"vagina,"however"even"
slight"penetration"was"sufficient"(hard"to"prove)."Woman"couldn’t"rape"&"men"couldn’t"be"
raped."
• What"is"a"woman"withdrew"consent"for"another"reason?"The"element"of"the"crime"could"only"
extend"to"the"accused"conduct"i.e."there"was"no"guilt"in"hiring"someone"to"rape"(no"common"
purpose).""
• If"due"to"the"force"used"a"woman"died"the"accused"would"only"be"liable"for"attempted"rape.""
• (3)"Without"consent:"Any"physical"resistance"would"suffice"as"a"lack"of"consent,"this"also"
extended"to"where"a"woman"would"submit."The"threat"didn’t"have"to"be"extreme.""
• There"are"certain"grounds"which"always"negate"consent,"(1)"Age"(being"too"young"to"consent),"
(2)"Mental"defect"(no"capacity),"(3)"Intoxication"(depends"on"degree"of"intoxication),"(4)"
Sleep/unconsciousness,"(5)"Fraud."
• Fraud"can"create"an"error&in&persona&(mistake"as"to"person),"for"example"where"X"induces"Y"to"
believe"they"are"their"husband"but"it"was"an"intruder"(R"v"C"1952),"where"the"state"of"identity"
43"
"
lacks"consent,"things"like"wealth,"age,"willingness"to"pay"are"not"included."Or"an"error&in&
negotio(mistake"as"to"the"nature"of"the"conduct"entered"into),"for"example"R"v"Williams"1923"
above."&"
• There"cannot"be"a"negligent"rape,"dolus&is"needed"i.e."the"accused"must"foresee"the"real"
possibility"one"element"isn’t"met"(no"consent/underage)."
• The"definition"of"rape"has"now"been"changed."
• Sexual"offences"act"now"defines"rape"as"any"person"who"(1)"unlawfully"&"(2)"intentionally"
causes"an"act"of"(3)"sexual"penetration"with"another"(4)"without"consent"is"guilty"of"rape."
• (3)"Sexual"penetration"extends"to"any"act"which"causes"penetration"to"any"extent"by"(a)"genital"
organs"into"other"genital"organs,"including"the"anus"or"mouth,"(b)"any"other"part"of"the"body"of"
the"person/object"including"any"part"of"an"animal’s"into"genitals"or"anus,"(c)"genital"organs"of"an"
animal"into"the"mouth"of"a"person."Genital"organs"include"the"whole/part"of"a"person’s"organs"
including"surgically"constructed"or"reconstructed"organs.""
• Note"that"‘causes’"now"creates"a"wider"scope,"you"don’t"have"to"have"intercourse"but"may"be"
liable"if"you"allow"it"to"happen"e.g."codperpetrators"(principle"or"by"imputation"or"agency)."This"
means"a"person"who"instructs/pays"another"to"rape"will"be"a"personal"perpetrator,"this"also"
applies"to"common"purpose."""
• Note:"insertion"of"a"body"part"that"isn’t"a"genital,"human"or"animal,"into"the"mouth"of"another"
isn’t"rape.""
• S1(2)"The"consent"must"be"a"voluntary/uncoerced"agreement"i.e."real"consent"or"knowledge"of"
all"the"material"facts"of"the"act."
• S1(3)"Lists"instances"where"there"isn’t"a"voluntary/uncoerced"agreement."(1)"Where"the"victim"
submits"due"to"(a)"force/intimidation,"(b)"threat"of"harm."(2)Abuse"of"power"of"authority"which"
inhibits"the"victim."(3)"Where"the"act"is"committed"through"fraudulent"means"(error&in&
persona/error&in&negotio)."(4)"Where"the"victim"is"incapable"of"appreciating"the"nature"of"the"
act."
• (1)"Submissions"due"to"force/intimidation:"are"accepted"in"our"law"as"someone"may"submit"to"
prevent"further"harm."Proof"where"there"are"no"injuries"is"a"problem."This"threat"doesn’t"have"
to"be"directly"against"the"victim"e.g."threat"of"family.""
• S1(3)b:"the"use"of"power/authority:"(S"v"Volschenk)(R"v"Swiggelaar)."
• S1(3)c:"Consent"obtained"by"fraud:"(S"v"Williams)"The"act"allows"for"other"types"of"fraud"e.g."if"
there"is"a"condition"of"no"HIV"&"one"party"lies"about"this."Again"misrepresentations"about"
wealth/age"ect."do"not"count."
• (1)"Unlawfulness:"Official"capacity"is"a"GOJ"where"people"working"in"a"professional"way"cannot"
be"liable"e.g."doctor/gynaecologist."This"would"also"be"covered"by"consent."Dolus&eventualis&
suffices"i.e."foresee"the"real"possibility"that"X’s"real"consent"is"lacking/underage"&"act"recklessly"
to"this."
• The"act"sets"out"a"number"of"minimum"prescribed"sentences"(S51):"Minimum"of"life"if"(a)"the"
victim"was"raped"by"more"than"1"perpetrator,"(b)"the"victim"was"raped"by"more"than"1"
perpetrator"through"common"purpose,"(c)"the"accused"is"already"convicted"of"2"or"more"
accounts"of"rape,"(d)"the"accused"knows"they"have"HIV,"(e)"the"victim"is"below"the"age"of"16,"(f)"
the"victim"is"physically"disabled,"(g)"the"victim"is"mentally"ill,"(h)"the"rape"involves"grievous"
44"
"
bodily"harm."Other"instances:"10"years"for"a"first"time"offender,"15"for"a"second"&"25"for"3rd"or"
more.""
Fraud(
• IS"the"(1)"unlawful"and"(2)"intentional"making"of"a"(3)"misrepresentation"which"causes"an"(4)"
actual/potential"prejudice"to"another."This"is"a"crime"of"a"trickster/liar,"the"crime"cannot"be"
negligent."Crucial"element"is"misrepresentation"followed"by"a"prejudice.""
(1) "Unlawfulness:"may"be"negated"by"a"GOJ"(coercion/compulsion/authority/superiority)."Would"
the"law"allow"consent"to"defraud?"
• Some"forms"of"misrepresentation"aren’t"unlawful"(puffing),"this"is"exaggerating"the"qualities"of"a"
thing"for"advertising"purposes."Misrepresentations"of"love/affection"are"also"not"illegal."
(2) Intention:"is"divided"into"(1)"an"intention"to"deceive"&"(2)"an"intention"by"the"deceit"to"induce"
another"to"act"to"their"detriment/prejudice."E.g."if"you"have"a"painting"you"claim"to"be"an"
original"painters"(but"you"know"it"isn’t)"there"is"only"intention"to"deceive"(not"criminal)."If"
however"you"do"this"to"induce"one"to"buy"the"painting"for"a"high"price"there"is"a"crime.""
• Dolus&eventualus"Is"needed"(no"negligent"fraud)"i.e."did"A"foresee"the"real"possibility"that"what"
he"is"saying"isn’t"true"&"the"person"may"be"prejudiced"due"to"this."We"figure"this"out"by"looking"
at"objective"factors"to"make"subjective"inferences"(S"v"Henkes)."
(3) "Misrepresentation:"this"is"the"conduct"requirement"which"is"created"through"an"incorrect"
statement"of"fact"or"law,"and"can"be"written/verbal/physical"(a"nod)."A"misrepresentation"can"
further"be"express"or"implied,"either"by"positive"conduct"or"by"omission"(nonddisclosure).""
• Misrepresentation"by"words:"must"encompass"a"false"statement"(question"of"fact),"often"
interpretation"is"used"to"determine"the"meaning"of"words.""
• Misrepresentation"by"conduct:"for"instance"is"X"was"to"buy"something"on"credit,"they"represent"
that"they"are"(1)"able"and"(2)"willing"to"pay."Or"where"X"was"to"insert"a"beerdcan"ring"into"a"
parking"meter"(S"v"Myeza)."""""
• Misrepresentation"by"silence:"is"more"common."This"arises"if"there"was"a"legal"duty"to"disclose,"
for"instance"where"a"director"of"a"company"must"disclose"their"interest"in"a"transaction"(S"v"
Heller)."This"also"arises"where"X’s"words,"even"though"true,"are"likely"to"give"a"false"impression."
E.g:"
45"
"
Case:"Dimmock"v"Hallett" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Misrepresentation"by"silence."""""""""((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:(A"seller"of"a"rentable"flat"claimed"he"had"a"tenant"on"their"property,"but"they"knew"the"tenant"
had"been"given"notice"of"leave."."" " " " " " """"""""" " """"""""""""""
Principle:(A"halfdtruth"gives"a"seller"a"legal"duty"to"disclose."
• Misrepresentation"of"state"of"mind:"Ties"in"with"a"misrepresentation"by"conduct"(buying"on"
credit)."These"must"be"misrepresentations"of"an"existing"fact,"not"future"conduct.""
• Misrepresentation"of"law:""
(4) Actual/potential"prejudice:"The"A"need"not"actually"make"a"gain."This"means"that"(1)"potential"
prejudice"suffices"(actual"not"needed),"&"(2)"prejudice"doesn’t"have"to"be"proprietary.""
(4.1)""What"is"potential"prejudice:"the"ambit"of"the"crime"has"extended"so"far"it’s"almost"impossible"
to"have"an"attempted"fraud."
Case:"R"v"Kruse"1946" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Potential"prejudice."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:"N/A" " " " " " " " " " """""""""""""
Principle:(A"misrepresentation"will"be"potential"if"in"the"ordinary"course"of"event"it"is"likely"to"cause"
prejudice.""
Case:"R"v"Heyne"1956" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Potential"prejudice."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:"N/A" " " " " " " " " " """""""""""""
Principle:(Likely"(from"Kruse"case)"means"that"it"doesn’t"mean"the"prejudice"is"a"certainty,"it"is"
enough"if"there"is"a"risk"of"certainty"(not"too"remote)."
Case:"S"v"Ostilly"1977" """" " " " " " """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Deals(with:(Potential"prejudice."""""""""(( (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
Facts:"N/A" " " " " " " " " " """""""""""""
Principle:(Misrepresentation"is"potentially"prejudicial"where"there"is"a"real"likelihood"it"will"cause"
prejudice."
46"
"
• Prejudice"may"be"looked"at"objectively,"i.e."the"ordinary"person"of"ordinary"knowledge,"it"
doesn’t"matter"if"the"victim"wouldn’t"have"believed"the"misrepresentation."Remember"the"test"
for"intention"is"still"subjective.""
• If"X"was"to"buy"the"glass"in"the"above"case"there"would"still"be"fraud"but"there"would"be"actual"
prejudice.""
• Existence"of"prejudice"must"be"determined"at"the"time"when"the"misrepresentation"is"made"
along"with"the"intention"to"induce"(contempornaity)."E.g."A"sells"B"shares"in"an"oil"company"
claiming"they"have"just"struck"oil"when"they"had"not,"but"shortly"after"they"do."B"is"in"a"better"
position"depending"on"where"you"assess"the"time"of"misrepresentation."If"they"had"struck"oil"
before"the"misrepresentation"but"A"didn’t"know,"A"will"be"liable"for"attempted"fraud"
(impossibility"is"recognised).""
(4.2)"Nondpropriety"prejudice:"Only"need"to"inconvenience"the"other"party."
47"
"
Principle:(If"A"was"to"induce"X"to"make"a"choice"they"would"otherwise"not"have"made,"there"is"
sufficient"potential"prejudice,"regardless"of"if"X"would"have"been"worse"off"or"not."
Assault(
• Is"the"(1)"Unlawful"and"(2)"intentional"act"of"either"(3)(a)"applying"force"to"another"or"(b)"
inspiring"the"belief"in"another"force"will"be"applied"to"them."
• The"slightest"contact"is"sufficient,"e.g."spitting"at"someone,"cutting"their"hair,"lifting"their"hat."
This"creates"a"very"wide"ambit"however"remember"the"law"doesn’t"concern"itself"with"trivialities.""
• (1)"Unlawfulness:"Can"be"negated"by"a"GOJ,"e.g"consent"(dancing,"sport);"authority"(policeman"in"
line"of"duty,"parental"authority);"private"defence"(self,"property).""
• (2)"Intention:"dolus&is"required,"there"cannot"be"a"negligent"assault,"i.e."did"A"foresee"the"real"
possibility"their"conduct"would"result"in"force"or"would"inspire"the"belief"force"will"be"applied.""
• (3)"Application"of"force:"(a)"Actual:"can"be"direct"(X"hits"Y)"or"indirect"(X"derails"a"train)."If"X"
administers"any"substance"against"Y’s"will"/"that"causes"internal"bodily"harm."
• (b)"Inspiring"belief/anticipation"of"force:"This"means"a"person"believes"physical"aggression"is"
imminent."The"test"is"generally"object"to"protect"against"worrisome"people,"subjectively"X"
doesn’t"have"to"feel"fear."The"fear"must"be"real"fear,"&"must"be"immediate,"just"because"a"threat"
of"harm"is"condition"doesn’t"mean"it"isn’t"a"threat"of"harm."
• X’s"belief"of"attack"may"be"awakened"by"acts/words/conduct."
• Attempted"assault"is"hard"to"find"as"the"crime"is"so"wide,"but"say"X"is"unaware"of"the"threat"
(sleeping"ect)"then"A"is"guilty"for"attempted"assault."
• It"is"possible"to"have"assault"with"intent"to"do"grievous"bodily"harm"which"is"established"through"
the"weapon"used"and"&"where"on"the"body"it"was"used."
"
48"
"