The accused entered onto the complainant’s farm in order to hunt an oryx and was charged with the offence of unlawful hunting of huntable game, and trespassing. The accused pleaded guilty to both counts and were accordingly convicted. The question arose whether there was a duplication of convictions when the court convicted on both counts. The correct approach would have been to apply the applicable tests from which the court would have concluded that, although the accused committed two separate acts, they had done so with a single intent and, in order to carry out their intention to hunt, they had to enter the farm. Both acts were thus necessary to carry out that single intent. The conviction and sentence on count two was set aside.