The anatomy of acquittal: Criminal liability thresholds in cases involving medical harm through a review of S v Beale

by | Jun 6, 2026 | SALJ, SALJ V143 I2 2026

NOTE

The anatomy of acquittal: Criminal liability thresholds in cases involving medical harm through a review of S v Beale

Author: Suhayfa Bhamjee & Shuaib Kauchali

ISSN: 1996-2177
Affiliations: Discipline Head, Public Law, School of Law, University of KwaZulu-Natal; Academic Head of Division of Community Paediatrics and Child Health, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand
Source: South African Law Journal, Volume 143 Issue 2, p. 221-239
https://doi.org/10.47348/SALJ/v143/i2a1

Abstract

This note examines the acquittal of Peter Gordon Beale in a South African criminal trial involving allegations of murder and fraud arising from paediatric surgical procedures. Through a detailed analysis of judicial reasoning, evidentiary shortcomings and medico-legal frameworks, we explore the complex intersection of clinical judgment, criminal intent and causation in medical harm. We argue that the prosecution’s failure to present structured, context-sensitive expert testimony and to reconstruct clinical decision-making contributed significantly to the court’s finding and Beale’s subsequent acquittal. Drawing on comparative jurisprudence, we propose a set of evidentiary standards and procedural reforms to guide future prosecutions, emphasising the need for independent investigations, blinded expert panels, and admissibility rules that prioritise clinical contexts. Ultimately, we advocate for a balanced accountability framework that protects patients while preserving the integrity of medical practice and that resists the temptation to lower evidentiary standards in response to prosecutorial failures.

Business rescue practitioners cannot have their cake and eat it: Cassim NO v Bombela Concession Company (RF) (Pty) Ltd

by | Jun 6, 2026 | SALJ, SALJ V143 I2 2026

NOTE

Business rescue practitioners cannot have their cake and eat it: Cassim NO v Bombela Concession Company (RF) (Pty) Ltd

Author: Jacobus Jan Louw Nieuwoudt

ISSN: 1996-2177
Affiliations: Adjunct Academic, University of South Africa
Source: South African Law Journal, Volume 143 Issue 2, p. 240-250
https://doi.org/10.47348/SALJ/v143/i2a2

Abstract

In the unreported case of Cassim NO v Bombela Concession Company (RF) (Pty) Ltd ((ZAGPJHC) case no 006216/25 of 16 May 2025), the court analysed and interpreted s 136(2)(b) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008, expanding the scope and effect of the cancellation power of the business rescue practitioner. The court adopted a substance test that ultimately allows the business rescue practitioner to cancel obligations in terms of a pre-commencement contract that were amended postcommencement. This unreported case builds on the still-developing legal discourse concerning the cancellation power of the business rescue practitioner, as previously considered in Du Toit v Azari Wind (Pty) Ltd 2022 (2) SA 510 (WCC). However, it raises important interpretational concerns, particularly regarding the potential purposive overreach of the court in pursuit of a desired outcome.

Corporate governance and artificial intelligence: The emerging legal challenges in South Africa’s boardrooms

by | Jun 6, 2026 | SALJ, SALJ V143 I2 2026

ARTICLE

Corporate governance and artificial intelligence: The emerging legal challenges in South Africa’s boardrooms

Author: Sebastian Krafzik

ISSN: 1996-2177
Affiliations: Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Department of Commercial Law, University of Cape Town
Source: South African Law Journal, Volume 143 Issue 2, p. 251-282
https://doi.org/10.47348/SALJ/v143/i2a3

Abstract

This article examines the emerging legal and governance challenges arising from the integration of artificial intelligence (‘AI’) into South African boardrooms. As AI technologies increasingly influence corporate decision-making, they raise complex questions about directors’ fiduciary duties, accountability, and the adequacy of existing legal frameworks. Drawing on the Companies Act 71 of 2008 and the King V Code, this article examines how the adoption of AI intersects with directors’ duties of care and diligence, particularly as reliance on algorithmic tools becomes more prevalent. It critically assesses recent literature that distinguishes between assisted, augmented and autonomous AI, using this framework to analyse varying levels of AI integration and their implications for governance. The article identifies significant regulatory gaps in current soft-law approaches and argues that the King V provisions, while representing meaningful progress, require further refinement to address boardroom-specific risks and accountability concerns. To that end, the article proposes a hybrid regulatory model that combines enhanced principles-based guidance with targeted amendments to company law. This approach aims to balance innovation with legal certainty, ensuring that South Africa’s corporate governance standards evolve in tandem with AI capabilities while preserving the ethical leadership and human accountability central to sound governance.

The shareholders’ agreement and the memorandum of incorporation: Inconsistencies, efficiencies and the missing nuance in section 15(7) of the Companies Act

by | Jun 6, 2026 | SALJ, SALJ V143 I2 2026

ARTICLE

The shareholders’ agreement and the memorandum of incorporation: Inconsistencies, efficiencies and the missing nuance in section 15(7) of the Companies Act

Author: Serena Kalbskopf

ISSN: 1996-2177
Affiliations: Attorney and Notary of the High Court of South Africa; Solicitor of the High Court of England and Wales
Source: South African Law Journal, Volume 143 Issue 2, p. 283-310
https://doi.org/10.47348/SALJ/v143/i2a4

Abstract

Section 15(7) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 radically altered the way in which the constitutional documents of a company — the memorandum of incorporation (‘MOI’) and the shareholders’ agreement — interact. Section 15(7) provides inter alia that any provision in the shareholders’ agreement that is inconsistent with a company’s MOI is void to the extent of the inconsistency. This article examines the interplay between the shareholders’ agreement and the MOI and offers recommendations for resolving any conflicts between the two. This article critically evaluates how the courts have interpreted s 15(7). The analysis reveals that our courts do not always interpret s 15(7) consistently or correctly. Where s 15(7) is applied correctly, it can lead to efficiencies in corporate governance, reaffirming the majority-rule doctrine that our corporate law embraces. Even when s 15(7) is not applied correctly, it can lead to absurd outcomes in which the provisions of a shareholders’ agreement are ignored despite all the shareholders consenting to them. Section 15(7) should ideally recognise unanimous shareholders’ agreements over the MOI in certain contexts. Given that legislative reform is not always realistic, I make practical recommendations to legal practitioners about navigating s 15(7).

An analysis of theoretical perspectives on executive remuneration vis-à-vis transformative constitutionalism in South Africa

by | Jun 6, 2026 | SALJ, SALJ V143 I2 2026

ARTICLE

An analysis of theoretical perspectives on executive remuneration vis-à-vis transformative constitutionalism in South Africa

Author: Ophellia Matobobo

ISSN: 1996-2177
Affiliations: Postdoctoral Research Fellow, University of South Africa
Source: South African Law Journal, Volume 143 Issue 2, p. 311-338
https://doi.org/10.47348/SALJ/v143/i2a5

Abstract

This article critically examines dominant theoretical perspectives on executive remuneration in the context of South Africa’s constitutional commitment to substantive equality, human dignity and social justice. Certain theories on executive remuneration are analysed to assess their explanatory power and normative adequacy in light of the country’s deeply entrenched socio-economic inequality. The article argues that while these theories have shaped remuneration practices in the corporate sector, they largely reinforce, rather than challenge, excessive pay disparities and fail to align with the transformative goals enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. Drawing on the concept of transformative constitutionalism, the article highlights the obligation of private actors, including companies, to respect and advance constitutional values. In response to the limitations of existing remuneration theories, the article proposes the Inclusive Redress Theory (‘IRT’), a normative framework grounded in principles of substantive equality and social redress. The IRT advocates for mechanisms such as maximum pay ratios and redress-linked incentive structures to ensure fairness and accountability in executive remuneration. The article concludes that adopting such a framework could help to focus corporate practices on the constitutional imperative of social transformation in post-apartheid South Africa.

Off-premises cannabis consumption and the workplace: Striking a balance between zero-tolerance policies and employee rights. An analysis of Enever v Barloworld

by | Jun 6, 2026 | SALJ, SALJ V143 I2 2026

ARTICLE

Off-premises cannabis consumption and the workplace: Striking a balance between zero-tolerance policies and employee rights. An analysis of Enever v Barloworld

Authors: Estie Gresse & Werner Gresse

ISSN: 1996-2177
Affiliations: Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law, North-West University; Senior Lecturer, School for Industrial Psychology and Human Resource Management, North-West University
Source: South African Law Journal, Volume 143 Issue 2, p. 339-372
https://doi.org/10.47348/SALJ/v143/i2a6

Abstract

South African labour law recognises both employers’ rights to discipline and employees’ rights to fair labour practices. While the Labour Relations Act (‘LRA’), the Constitution and the Employment Equity Act prohibit unfair discrimination and guarantee fair dismissals, employers may implement workplace safety rules, including zero-tolerance drug policies. Following Prince v Minister of Justice (2018), which decriminalised private cannabis use, disputes have arisen over employees’ dismissal for positive tests. In Enever v Barloworld (2024), a category analyst was dismissed under her employer’s zero-tolerance policy after repeatedly testing positive for cannabis used privately for health and religious reasons. The Labour Court upheld the dismissal, emphasising workplace safety. However, the Labour Appeal Court overturned it, finding the dismissal to be automatically unfair and discriminatory under s 187(1)(f ) of the LRA, as it impaired the employee’s dignity and failed to distinguish between workplace safety risks and private use. This article argues that employers must reassess zero-tolerance cannabis policies to account for job requirements, fairness and constitutional rights, to balance workplace discipline with employee rights in an appropriate way.