MAY/JUNE 2023

1 Read the following facts and then choose the correct option below: Suppose X wants
to kill Y. She shoots at Y, but the bullet is deflected by stone, misses Y and hits Z
instead. This is an example of:

[1] error in subject.

[2] aberration ictus.
[3] error in objecto.
[4] dolus eventualis.

(2)

2 Vicarious liability is possible only in …

[1] Statutory crimes.

[2] Statutory defence.
[3] Statutory offence.
[4] None of the above.

(2)

3 Volenti non fit iniuria …

[1] A mistake relating to the nature of the act.

[2] A mistake relating to the identity.
[3] No wrongdoing is committed in respect of somebody who has consented.
[4] Presumed consent.

(2)

4 X’s act is the factual cause of Y’s death if it is a conditio sine qua non for Y’s death,
which means that there is:

[1] ‘’but-for causation’’ or a ‘’but-for’’ link between X’s act and Y’s death.
[2] ‘’but-for’’ link between X’s act and his state of mind at the time.
[3] a policy consideration which would make X the factual cause of Y’s death.
[4] a policy consideration which would make X the legal cause of Y’s death.

(2)

5 Where a police official sees a person being unlawfully assaulted, and fails to assist
the person, he may be liable for this omission on the basis of:
 [1] a previous positive act.
[2] a protective relationship.
[3] the common law.
[4] holding a certain office.

(2)

6 Well-known grounds of justification include:

[1] private defence, right of chastisement and consent.

[2] private defence, necessity and consent.
[3] necessity, official capacity and justification.
[4] necessity, private defence and right of chastisement.

(2)

7 A mental defect is usually present from an early age and is also of a:

[1] diseased nature.

[2] permanent nature.
[3] indefinite nature.
[4] fleeting nature.

(2)

8 Does the following offence comply with the principle of legality? Parliament enacts a
new law which provides that it is a crime if a person does not behave properly in
public.

[1] The offence complies with all the rules in the principle of legality.
[2] The offence does not comply with the principle of legality since it is only a
legal norm.
[3] The offence does not comply with the principle of legality because there is no
penalty attached.
[4] The offence complies with the principle of legality as it contains a criminal
sanction.

(2)

9 The rule referred to as the ‘’prohibition on retrospectivity’’ in the principle of legality

means that the conduct of the accused person:

[1] must be recognised as a crime after its commission.

[2] does not have to be recognised as a crime.
[3] must be recognised as a crime in common law.
[4] must have been recognised as a crime at the time of it commission.
 (2)

10 Writers on criminal law use the word ‘’act’’ in a wide sense to refer to:

[1] positive acts.

[2] both an act and an omission.
[3] active conduct.
[4] positive conduct.

(2)

11 An inquiry into X’s criminal liability always consists of firstly establishing whether the
type of conduct forming the basis of the charge is:

[1] recognised as a crime in our law.

[2] immoral or dangerous to society.
[3] worthy of being punished as a crime in the opinion of the court.
[4] an example of unlawful conduct.

(2)

12 According to the theory of adequate causation, an act will be a legal cause if,
according to:

[1] the experience of the reasonable person, the act has a tendency to bring
about that type of effect.
[2] a normal human experience, the act has a tendency to bring about that type
of effect.
[3] the experience of the reasonable person, the act has a tendency to bring
about that type of effect.
[4] the experience of a lawyer, the act has a tendency to bring about that type of
effect.
(2)

13 One of the requirements for a valid plea of necessity is that:

[1] The emergency must be imminent, but must not already have begun or have
already terminated.
[2] The emergency must already have begun or be imminent, but must not have
been terminated, or be expected only in the future.
[3] The emergency must be imminent, or must be expected at some time in the
future.
[4] The emergency must have terminated.

(2)

14 In the case of materially defined crimes, the definitional elements proscribe any
conduct: Select one:
 [1] that causes a specific condition.
[2] that causes a specific type of link.
[3] that is accompanied by culpability.
[4] that is accompanied by unlawfulness.

(2)

15 The question whether X acted intentionally or negligently arises only once it has
been established that X had:

[1] criminal capacity.

[2] acted unlawfully.
[3] committed a crime.
[4] committed an act.

(2)

16 In Molimi 2006 (2) SACR 8 (SCA), the Supreme Court of Appeal held that:

[1] conduct by a member of a group of persons that differs from the conduct
envisaged in their initial mandate to the other members.
[2] for an accused to have a common purpose with others to commit murder, it
is not necessary that his intentions directus.
[3] the common law principle that requires mere ‘’active association’’ instead of
causation as a basis of liability in constitutional.
[4] that the joiner-in could not be convicted of murder, but only of attempted
murder.

(2)

17 Unlawfulness is usually determined:

[1] with reference to X’s state of mind.

[2] with reference to X’s act or conduct.
[3] without reference to X’s state of mind.
[4] with reference to the legality of X’s conduct.

(2)

18 In Director of Public Prosecutions, Western Cape v Prins 2012 9 SACR 183 (SCP), it
was decided that a person:

[1] cannot be convicted of a statutory crime if there is no punishment attached

to the crime.
[2] cannot be convicted of a crime if there is no punishment attached to the
crime.
 [3] can be convicted of a crime even if there is no punishment attached to the
crime.
[4] can be convicted of a common-law crime even if there is no punishment
attached to the crime.

(2)

19 The standard by which we test for negligence is generally referred to as:

[1] a reasonable standard of subjectivity.

[2] a subjective standard.
[3] a reasonable person standard.
[4] an internal standard.

(2)

20 Conduct can lead to liability only if it is:

[1] muscular voluntaries.

[2] voluntary.
[3] willed.
[4] a bodily movement.

(2)

21 The requirement that X’s conduct must be accompanied by culpability. Is satisfied if

X has committed:

[1] the unlawful act with a blameworthy state of mind.

[2] an act that is recognised as a crime by the law.
[3] an unlawful act or omission to act.
[4] an act that complies with the principle of legality.

(2)

22 If the defence of youth is successful, the court will find X not guilty and:

[1] place X under the court’s supervision.

[2] acquit X.
[3] place X under adult supervision.
[4] acquit X, but charge X’s parents.

(2)

23 One of the requirements of the ground of justification of obedience to orders is that

the order:
 [1] can be unlawful but given with good intentions.
[2] can be manifestly unlawful.
[3] must be lawful.
[4] can be lawful or unlawful.

(2)

24 When proving X’s intention, factors involving general human experience, are an
example of:

[1] objective proof of intention.

[2] reasonable proof of intention.
[3] indirect proof of intention.
[4] direct proof of intention.

(2)

25 Persons such as police officials, solders and fire-fighters cannot rely on necessity as a
ground of justification because they:

[1] are aware of the dangers associated with their profession.

[2] themselves are often responsible for the situation of emergency.
[3] have a duty to protect innocent third parties or members of the public.
[4] are legally compelled to endure the dangers inherent in the exercise of their
profession.

(2)

26 In Masiya v Director of Public Prosecutions 2007 (2) SACR 435 (CC), the
Constitutional Court held that:

[1] a court may not consider the constitutional of a common-law rule or change
it.
[2] the courts have the major responsibility for law reform.
[3] a court may not broaden the definition of the common-law crime of rape.
[4] a court may extend a crime’s field of application, but not to the detriment of
the accused.

(2)

27 The test for mental illness as a defence excluding criminal capacity has two aspects a

[1] pathological aspect and a biological aspect.

[2] biological or pathological aspect and a psychological aspect.
[3] pathological aspect and a physiological aspect.
[4] psychiatric aspect and a physical aspect.
 (2)

28 The term aberratio ictus refers to:

[1] a mistake.
[2] an error in law.
[3] the going astray of the blow or bullet.
[4] the going astray of a person.

(2)

29 Read the following facts then choose the correct option: X obtains consent from Y, a
mentally-ill woman, to have sexual intercourse with her.

[1] X can rely on consent as a ground of justification since he has complied with
all the requirements of consent.
[2] X cannot rely on consent as a ground of justification since Y is not endowed
with minimum mental abilities.
[3] X cannot rely on consent as a ground of justification since he should have
obtained Y’s parent’s consent first.
[4] X cannot rely on consent as a ground of justification since he should have
obtained Y’s consent in writing first.

(2)

30 Children under the age of seven years can:

[1] be held criminally liable for their conduct.

[2] never be held criminally liable for any conduct.
[3] sometimes be held criminally liable for their conduct.
[4] in certain instances be held criminally liable for their conduct.

(2)

31 A mental defect is usually present from an early age and is also of a:

[1] diseased nature.

[2] permanent nature.
[3] indefinite nature.
[4] fleeting nature.

(2)

32 Read the following facts then choose the correct option below: X, an 11-year-old
boy, is caught stealing a watch from a jewellery shop worth R20 000 for the purposes
 of selling it and using the money to buy a pair of expensive sneakers. Can X be
criminally prosecuted for the theft of the watch?

[1] Yes, if the state can prove beyond reasonable doubt that X committed the
crime.
[2] No, because X is presumed to lack criminal capacity.
[3] Yes, because X committed an unlawful act intentionally.
[4] No, because X is irrebuttably presumed to lack criminal capacity.

(2)

33 Read the following facts and then choose the best option below: X shoots Y in the
back with a revolver. Y falls to the ground, seriously wounded. Y will die if he does
not receive medical treatment within 30 minutes. Z appears on the scene, and
shoots Y in the head. Y dies instantly. X is:

Select one:

[1] not the factual cause of Y’s death because Z’s shot was the immediate cause
of Y’s death.
[2] the legal cause of Y’s death because of the presence of a novus actus
interveniens.
[3] the factual cause of Y’s death because of the presence of a novus actus
interveniens.
[4] both the factual and the legal cause of Y’s death.

(2)

34 Read the following facts then choose the correct option below: In January 2022, X is
charged with drunken driving which he allegedly committed in September 2020.
Assume that in 2020 legislation provided that a first offender could not be sent to
prison for a conviction of drunken driving. However, in 2021, the legislature
amended the legislation, giving the courts a discretion to send a first offender
convicted of drunken driving to prison for a period not exceeding six months. X, a
first offender, is convicted of the crime of drunken driving. The court, relying on the
new legislation, sentences him to a period of three months’ imprisonment. The
punishment imposed by the court may be challenged on the ground that it violates:

[1] the ius praevium principle.

[2] the ius certum principle.
[3] the ius strictum principle.
[4] the ius acceptum principle.

(2)
35 Read the following facts then choose the correct option below: If X shoots and kills a
person, in the belief that the person is trying to break into her home, whereas the
person is in fact, Y, X’s husband, who is trying to enter their home at night, X may:

[1] not rely on private defence on a charge of murder since she has exceeded the
limits of this ground of justification.
[2] rely on private defence on a charge of murder since she has met all the
requirements of the ground of justification.
[3] rely on putative private defence on a charge of murder since the attack only
existed in X’s mind or thoughts.
[4] not rely on putative private defence on a charge of murder since the attack
was not completed.

(2)

36 Read the following facts then choose the correct option below: X’s hobby is to fly a
micro-light plane. One day, while flying over a beach, the engine of his plane
suddenly stalls. X is unable to control the plane and it crashes on the beach. The boat
of Y, a fisherman, is damaged by the impact. X is charged with malicious injury to the
property of Y. X may invoke the defence:

[1] that he had no intention to damage Y's property.

[2] that his act was not unlawful but caused by natural forces.
[3] that he did not perform a voluntary act. Correct
[4] of his plane's engine failure (i.e., mechanical causes).

(2)

37 Which one of the following acts is punishable in terms of criminal law?

[1] X, an 80-year-old man, whilst driving experiences a mental blackout as a

result of low blood pressure. He thereafter loses control of his motor vehicle
and hits and injures a pedestrian.
[2] X orders Y to shoot and kill Z and threatens to kill Y himself if Y refuses to
comply with the order. Y then shoots and kills Z.
[3] X incites his dog to bite his neighbour Y whom he dislikes. The dog bites and
injures Y. Correct
[4] X, a person who suffers from epilepsy, swings his hand while having an
epileptic fit and hits Y in the face.

(2)

38 Read the following facts and then choose the correct option: X attacks Y with a knife
in Z’s backyard. With no means to defend himself, Y kicks down a part of Z’s fence in
order to escape the attack. On a charge of malicious injury to property, Y may:
 [1] not rely on private defence, as the act of defence is not directed against the
attacker.
[2] rely on the defence of necessity, as the act of defence is directed against the
interests of an innocent third party.
[3] not rely on the defence of necessity, as the act of defence is not directed
against the attacker.
[4] rely on private defence, as the act of defence arose from an unlawful act.

(2)

39 Which one of the following statements is correct?

[1] For X to succeed with the defence of impossibility, he only needs to prove
that it was subjectively impossible for him to perform the act.
[2] In Minister van Polisie v Ewels 1975 (3) SA 590 (A), the court held that there is
a legal duty on a person to act positively, if the omission elicits not only moral
indignation but also if the legal convictions of the community require that
such a legal duty exists.
[3] In Henry 1999 (1) SACR 13 (SCA), the court held that sane automatism means
that a person acted without intention.
[4] In Goliath 1972 (3) SA (A), the court acquitted the accused on the basis that
he had failed to perform a voluntary act.

(2)

40 Read the following facts then choose the correct option below: X assaults Y by hitting
him with a cricket bat and breaks Y's arm. Z, who has witnessed the assault, decides
to help Y by taking him to the hospital for treatment. Z is drinking and driving, and
his judgement is impaired. Z drives recklessly and constantly sways the car from side
to side. Y notices this and is scared for his life. Y opens the door of Z’s car and jumps
out. He is hit by another car and suffers serious head injuries which results in his
death.

[1] Z is the factual cause of Y’s death because he was driving the motor vehicle in
a reckless manner which resulted in Y jumping out of the car and dying as a
result.
[2] X is not the factual cause of Y’s death because Z's conduct represents a novus
actus interveniens between X's act and that of Y jumping from a moving
motor vehicle.
[3] Y is the factual cause of his own death because he died as a result of his own
conduct of jumping out of a moving vehicle.
[4] X is the factual cause of Y’s death because if he did not assault Y, Y would not
have been in the motor vehicle in the first place.
 (2)

41 Read the following facts then choose the correct option: X assaults and strangles Y.
Believing Y to be dead, X sets fire to the house. Y dies in the fire. X will:

[1] not be convicted of Y's murder as there is no causal connection between X’s
initial act of strangulation and Y’s eventual death in the fire.
[2] not be convicted of Y's murder as he had no intention of killing Y by way of
fire.
[3] be convicted of Y's murder as his initial act of strangulation complies with the
definitional elements of the crime of murder.
[4] be convicted of Y's murder as his acts of strangulation and arson amount to a
single course of conduct.

(2)

42 When proving X’s intention, statements made by other witnesses about X are an
example of:

[1] direct proof of intention

[2] indirect proof of intention
[3] eyewitness testimony
[4] hearsay

(2)

43 Read the following facts and then choose the correct option: Y threatens to kill X if X
does not kill Z.

[1] This is a case of absolute compulsion since X has no choice in the matter.
[2] This is a case of absolute compulsion but does not amount to a situation of
necessity.
[3] This is a case of relative compulsion and may amount to a situation of
necessity.
[4] This is a case of relative compulsion and may amount to a situation of
consent.

(2)

44. The general rule regarding omissions is that there is a:

[1] legal duty upon X to act positively if the legal conviction of the community
require him to do so.
[2] moral duty upon X to act positively if the belief of the community require him
to do so.
[3] legal duty upon X to refrain from conduct if the legal convictions of the
 community require him to do so.
[4] moral duty upon X to act positively if the legal convictions of the community
require him to do so.

(2)

45. X will still be guilty of murder if he gives his terminally ill father a fatal dose of a drug
in order to relieve his father of pain and suffering, since:

[1] X committed an act that must be performed by a qualified physician.

[2] X’s motive is immaterial.
[3] X should have obtained his father’s express consent.
[4] X had a selfish motive.

(2)

46. Unlawfulness is excluded because of the presence of:

[1] grounds of justification.

[2] culpability on the part of X.
[3] an act that corresponds to the definitional.
[4] the principle of legality.

(2)

47. Inchoate crimes deal with form of punishable conduct where a person:

[1] tries to commit a crime, but the act is not successful.

[2] agrees to commit a crime with another, and the act is successful.
[3] conspires to commit a crime with another, and the act is successful.
[4] thinks of committing a crime, but abandons his criminal thoughts.

(2)

48. An inquiry into X’s criminal liability always consists of firstly establishing whether the
type of conduct forming the basis of the charge is:

[1] recognised as a crime in our law.

[2] immoral or dangerous to society.
[3] worthy of being punished as a crime in the opinion of the court.
[4] an example of unlawful conduct.

(2)

49. Malicious injury to property can be committed:

 [1] Negligently.
[2] Maliciously.
[3] Suspiciously.
[4] Intentionally and unlawfully.

(2)

50. Unlawfulness is excluded because of the presence of:

[1] grounds of justification.

[2] culpability on the part of X.
[3] an act that corresponds to the definitional elements.
[4] the principle of legality.

(2)