Bam and Others v Minster of Correctional Services (58/2011) [2012] ZAECPEHC 66 (18 September 2012)

Bam and Others v Minster of Correctional Services (58/2011) [2012] ZAECPEHC 66 (18 September 2012)

The court found that the defendant's version was more probable and consistent with the evidence and common cause facts. The first and third plaintiffs were assaulted by correctional officials, and quantum was determined based on comparable cases and the severity of injuries. The second and fourth plaintiffs were found to have been the aggressors, and the force used by officials was justified as self-defence in a situation of imminent peril, with a crowd of inmates threatening the officials. The claims of the second and fourth plaintiffs were dismissed, while the first and third plaintiffs were awarded damages and costs.

Citation
[2012] ZAECPEHC 66
Parties
Plaintiff: Sivuyile Boetana Bam; Plaintiff: Sandiso Dlakavu; Plaintiff: Sivuyile Yako; Plaintiff: Zola Skefile; Defendant: The Minister of Correctional Services
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 September 2012
Case Number
58/2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Action / Trial and Quantum Determination
Outcome
First and third plaintiffs' claims for damages succeed; second and fourth plaintiffs' claims dismissed with costs.
Judges
M Roberson
Legal Topics
Assault by State Officials, Quantum of Damages, Self Defence, Vicarious Liability
Delict Civil Procedure Assault by State Officials Quantum of Damages Self Defence Vicarious Liability

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sivuyile Boetana Bam

Plaintiff

Sandiso Dlakavu

Plaintiff

Sivuyile Yako

Plaintiff

Zola Skefile

Plaintiff

The Minister of Correctional Services

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action / Trial and Quantum Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the assaults on the plaintiffs by correctional officials were unlawful and actionable.
  2. 2 Whether the force used by correctional officials against the second and fourth plaintiffs was justified as self-defence.
  3. 3 Determination of quantum of damages for the first and third plaintiffs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant's version was more probable and consistent with the evidence and common cause facts. The first and third plaintiffs were assaulted by correctional officials, and quantum was determined based on comparable cases and the severity of injuries. The second and fourth plaintiffs were found to have been the aggressors, and the force used by officials was justified as self-defence in a situation of imminent peril, with a crowd of inmates threatening the officials. The claims of the second and fourth plaintiffs were dismissed, while the first and third plaintiffs were awarded damages and costs.

Court Disposition

First and third plaintiffs' claims for damages succeed; second and fourth plaintiffs' claims dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The defendant is ordered to pay the first plaintiff R180,000.00 for general damages and R128,556.00 for future medical expenses.
  • Interest on the above amounts at the legal rate from date of judgment to date of payment.