23 it is a high court, a regional court or a magistrates’ court. In this way it was submitted that the principle of legality is satisfied. It is immaterial, so this argument proceeded, that the provisions in regard to sentence are derived from a statute other than the Act and need to be garnered from s 276, read with the jurisdictional limitations on the court before which the accused is charged. That is the case with, for example, rape, where the sentencing powers of courts are derived from the minimum sentencing legislation. It is the case with all common law crimes, where the elements of the offence are derived from the common law and the sentencing powers of the court derive from s 276 of the CPA. The State contended that the same position prevails when a statute creates a crime but does not itself provide for a penalty. The permissible penalties are then to be found in s 276 read with the relevant provisions (if any) regarding the powers of the court concerned in regard to sentence. [29] Counsel for Mr Prins join issue with this argument. They contend that the opening words of s 276(1), namely: ‘Subject to the provisions of this Act and any other law and of the common law, the following sentences may be passed upon a person convicted of an offence …’, contain a general enabling provision, as far as the various forms of punishment are concerned, but are not meant as a source of the power to sentence an offender for a statutory crime. They rely on the following passage from the judgment of this court in S v Van Dyk:38 ‘The correct interpretation of the section must be determined from the context of s 276 as a whole. It is headed: “Nature of Punishments”. Section 276(1) lists, in general terms, various forms of punishment available for consideration and imposition by a court which has convicted a person of an offence either in terms of a particular statute or under the common law. The use of the words “subject to” at the beginning of subsec (1) indicates that the subsection will be subservient to any provision of the 38 S v Van Dyk fn 16 above, para 10.