Raymond Daniel de Villiers v The State

The appellant, an accountant, received R950 000 in 2005 from a client, Mrs Wiese, to invest on her behalf. Instead, he misappropriated the funds for his own speculative business ventures and failed to repay them on demand. He was charged with fraud alternatively theft, pleaded guilty to theft in terms of s 112 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977, and was convicted in the Regional Court, Bloemfontein. He was sentenced in 2011 to seven years’ imprisonment, three years of which were suspended. After lengthy appeal and review proceedings, leave to appeal against sentence was granted to the Full Court of the Free State Division. Nearly nine years later, the Full Court heard the appeal, admitted further evidence regarding changed personal circumstances of the appellant, dismissed the appeal against sentence, but ordered the appellant to pay R900 000 to the complainant as compensation in terms of s 300 of the CPA. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal against the compensation order.

The appeal succeeded. The entire order of the Full Court dated 8 February 2021 was set aside. The sentence imposed by the Regional Court on 29 November 2011 was set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Regional Court, Bloemfontein, for sentencing afresh, with the further evidence admitted by the Full Court to be considered.

The case clarifies the strict jurisdictional limits of s 300 of the Criminal Procedure Act, confirming that only the court of conviction may grant a compensation order and only upon proper application. It reinforces procedural fairness requirements in sentencing and compensation orders, and affirms the appellate courts’ power, in appropriate circumstances, to widen the scope of an appeal to ensure justice. The judgment is significant for delineating the boundaries between restorative justice measures and appellate jurisdiction in South African criminal procedure.