114:, an important case in South African criminal law, the Appellate Division held that a person is justified in killing in self-defence not only when he fears that his life is in danger but also when he fears grievous bodily harm. PE Linde appeared for the appellant and BG van der Walt, SC, Attorney-General OFS, for the State. The case was heard on March 8, 1963. The appellant's attorney was DA Carroll, Johannesburg.
131:
The court held that the trial judge should have directed the jury that the appellant would have been justified in shooting the deceased if he justifiably feared that he was about to suffer grievous bodily harm at his hands. The failure so to direct the jury was an irregularity which had prejudiced
122:
In an appeal from a conviction of culpable homicide on a charge of murder, it appeared that the trial judge had repeatedly directed the jury that they could not acquit the appellant, on his plea of self-defence, unless they came to the conclusion that a reasonable man in his situation would have
132:
the appellant, because it appeared that the jury might have found that, even though he did not fear for his life, he most certainly feared very serious bodily harm when he was assaulted by the deceased. The appeal was accordingly allowed and the conviction and sentence set aside.
204:
219:
209:
32:
151:
214:
68:
146:
198:
141:
94:
Criminal law, Murder, Culpable homicide, Self-defence
98:
88:
80:
75:
63:
48:
38:
28:
23:
8:
20:
205:Appellate Division (South Africa) cases
181:
7:
123:feared that his life was in danger.
84:Steyn CJ, Wessels JA and Hoexter AJA
14:
220:South African criminal case law
1:
236:
152:South African criminal law
210:1963 in South African law
93:
16:South African legal case
52:18 March 1963
188:1963 (2) SA 626 (A).
171:1963 (2) SA 626 (A).
147:Law of South Africa
33:Appellate Division
106:
105:
227:
215:1963 in case law
189:
186:
76:Court membership
59:
57:
21:
235:
234:
230:
229:
228:
226:
225:
224:
195:
194:
193:
192:
187:
183:
178:
165:
160:
138:
129:
120:
55:
53:
17:
12:
11:
5:
233:
231:
223:
222:
217:
212:
207:
197:
196:
191:
190:
180:
179:
177:
174:
173:
172:
164:
161:
159:
156:
155:
154:
149:
144:
137:
134:
128:
125:
119:
116:
104:
103:
100:
96:
95:
91:
90:
86:
85:
82:
81:Judges sitting
78:
77:
73:
72:
65:
61:
60:
50:
46:
45:
40:
39:Full case name
36:
35:
30:
26:
25:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
232:
221:
218:
216:
213:
211:
208:
206:
203:
202:
200:
185:
182:
175:
170:
167:
166:
162:
157:
153:
150:
148:
145:
143:
140:
139:
135:
133:
126:
124:
117:
115:
113:
112:
101:
97:
92:
89:Case opinions
87:
83:
79:
74:
70:
66:
62:
51:
47:
44:
41:
37:
34:
31:
27:
22:
19:
184:
168:
130:
121:
110:
109:
107:
43:S v Jackson
42:
18:
169:S v Jackson
111:S v Jackson
102:Hoexter AJA
99:Decision by
24:S v Jackson
199:Categories
158:References
56:1963-03-18
67:1963 (2)
163:Case law
136:See also
127:Judgment
64:Citation
71:626 (A)
54: (
49:Decided
176:Notes
142:Crime
118:Facts
29:Court
108:In
201::
69:SA
58:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.