Previous 1 / 21 Next

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA Case CCT 26/08 [2008] ZACC 21 IZAK ANDREAS GELDENHUYS Applicant and NATIONAL DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS First Respondent DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS, TRANSVAAL MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT Heard on : Decided on : Second Respondent Third Respondent 28 August 2008 26 November 2008 JUDGMENT MOKGORO J: Introduction [1] This is an application by a 53-year old man, a dentist by profession (the applicant), for confirmation of an order made by the Supreme Court of Appeal, declaring unconstitutional sections 14(1)(b) and 14(3)(b) of the erstwhile Sexual

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

IZAK ANDREAS GELDENHUYS v NATIONAL DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS et al, 2008

Cases

Country

Latitude: -31.005484474142992

Longitude: 23.460146846172638

Country (linked Cases): South Africa

Court location: South Africa: Transvaal

Court: South Africa: Constitutional Court, South Africa

Date of judgement: Aug 28, 2008

Keywords

Child abuse
Right to dignity
Sexual offences

Gender of victim

Female: Girl (under 18)

Gender of accused/perpetrator

Male: Man (18+)

Language: English

Summary: This case concerns the applicant, Izak Andreas Geldenhuys, who had sexual relations with a boy below the age of 19 years and was convicted on 10 counts of contravening a now repealed provisions of the Sexual Offence Act. The applicant then made an application for confirmation of the order of invalidity of his charges seeking to appeal his convictions.

The Supreme Court of Appeal found the differentiation between the ages of consent for same-sex and heterosexual persons to be unfair discrimination under the Constitution and accordingly replaced the age of 19 years with 16 years, creating a uniform age of consent. Consequently the SCA overturned, pending confirmation of the order of constitutional invalidity by this Court, the applicant’s convictions on six of the ten counts where the sexual acts in question had taken place after the boy’s 16th birthday. Now the only issue before the court was what the appropriate remedy should be

The court held that the differentiation did amount to unfair discrimination but declined to set the level of consent at 18 years. Further, the decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal was accordingly confirmed. Finally the appeal was also later dismissed.

Primary Documents

Geldenhuys v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others - children and age of consent for same sex intercourse.pdf
English
Download View