''S v Rabie'' is an important case in
South African law
South Africa has a 'hybrid' or 'mixed' legal system, formed by the interweaving of a number of distinct legal traditions: a civil law system inherited from the Dutch, a common law system inherited from the British, and a customary law syst ...
, heard in the Appellate Division on 12 September 1975, with judgment handed down on 23 September. The presiding officers were Holmes JA, Corbett JA and Kotzé AJA. The case is significant primarily in the area of sentencing, with its determination that the punishment should
* fit the criminal as well as the crime;
* be fair to society; and
* be blended with a measure of mercy according to the circumstances.
The court held that in every appeal against a sentence, whether imposed by a magistrate or a Judge, the Court hearing the appeal
# should be guided by the principle that punishment is "pre-eminently a matter for the discretion of the trial Court"; and
# should be careful not to erode such discretion; hence the further principle that the sentence should only be altered if the discretion has not been "judicially and properly exercised."
The test under the second of these points is whether the sentence is vitiated by irregularity or misdirection or is disturbingly inappropriate.
Facts
The appellant had been convicted on nineteen counts of fraud, which had been taken together for the purposes of sentence, the appellant having been sentenced to
* a fine of R5 000; and
* imprisonment for three years, of which two years had been suspended on relevant conditions.
In addition he had been convicted and fined on three counts of
overcharging.
In an appeal against the sentence on the nineteen counts of fraud, it was contended that they amounted substantially to the same offence of overcharging in contravention of the Rents Act,
[s 10(1)(a).] for which the appellant had merely been fined on the other three counts on which he had been convicted.
Judgment
The Court, however, found that the fraud was intended to be and was a cover-up for the unlawful overcharging of rents, and held that there was no basis for appellate interference with the trial Judge's sentence. The Appellate Division did not have an overriding discretion to ameliorate the sentences of trial Courts. The discretion was pre-eminently theirs, alterable only on the grounds mentioned above. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.
See also
*
Crime in South Africa
Crime in South Africa includes all violent and non-violent crimes that take place in the country of South Africa, or otherwise within its jurisdiction. When compared to other countries, South Africa has notably high rates of violent crime and ...
*
Criminal procedure in South Africa
*
Law of South Africa
South Africa has a 'hybrid' or 'mixed' legal system, formed by the interweaving of a number of distinct legal traditions: a civil law system inherited from the Dutch, a common law system inherited from the British, and a customary law syst ...
*
South African criminal law
South African criminal law is the body of national law relating to crime in South Africa. In the definition of Van der Walt ''et al.'', a crime is "conduct which Common law, common or statute law prohibits and expressly or impliedly subjects to ...
*
Sentence (law)
In criminal law, a sentence is the punishment for a crime ordered by a trial court after conviction in a criminal procedure, normally at the conclusion of a trial. A sentence may consist of imprisonment, a fine, or other sanctions. Sentence ...
References
Case law
* ''S v Rabie'' 1975 (4)
SA 855 (A).
Legislation
* Rents Act 43 of 1950.
Notes
Appellate Division (South Africa) cases
1975 in South African law
1975 in case law
{{SouthAfrica-case-law-stub