Bergman v Minister Van Veiligheid En Sekuriteit (5037/2012) [2015] ZAFSHC 184 (17 September 2015)

Bergman v Minister Van Veiligheid En Sekuriteit (5037/2012) [2015] ZAFSHC 184 (17 September 2015)

The court found that the police received the incident report at 19:57 and arrived on the scene at 20:15, within a reasonable time. The evidence presented by the applicant regarding delayed police response was inconsistent, unreliable, and contradicted by objective cellular and vehicle tracking data. The police did not breach their legal duty to protect the applicant, nor did they act negligently. There was no causal link established between any alleged omission by the police and the damages suffered by the applicant. The applicant failed to discharge the onus of proof required to establish liability. Accordingly, the action was dismissed and the defendant was not held liable for any...

Citation
[2015] ZAFSHC 184
Parties
Applicant: Lizelle Jolene Bergman; Respondent: Minister Van Veiligheid En Sekuriteit
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 September 2015
Case Number
5037/2012
Procedural Posture
Delictual Action / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Action dismissed; defendant not liable for damages.
Judges
Rampai
Legal Topics
Police Negligence, Constitutional Duty to Protect, Wrongful Omission, Causation, Rape Victim Damages
Delict Police Negligence Constitutional Duty to Protect Wrongful Omission Causation Rape Victim Damages

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lizelle Jolene Bergman

Applicant

Minister Van Veiligheid En Sekuriteit

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Delictual Action / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the police owe the plaintiff a legal duty to protect her against violent crime and sexual abuse?
  2. 2 Did the police breach their legal duty by failing to respond to the incident report within a reasonable time?
  3. 3 Was there a causal connection between any alleged breach and the damages suffered by the plaintiff?

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the police received the incident report at 19:57 and arrived on the scene at 20:15, within a reasonable time. The evidence presented by the applicant regarding delayed police response was inconsistent, unreliable, and contradicted by objective cellular and vehicle tracking data. The police did not breach their legal duty to protect the applicant, nor did they act negligently. There was no causal link established between any alleged omission by the police and the damages suffered by the applicant. The applicant failed to discharge the onus of proof required to establish liability. Accordingly, the action was dismissed and the defendant was not held liable for any...

Court Disposition

Action dismissed; defendant not liable for damages.

Orders

  • The action is dismissed.
  • The defendant is not liable for any damages the plaintiff may prove to have suffered during the course of the criminal attack, assault and rape committed at plot 171 Stasie Weg, Bloemspruit, Bloemfontein on 25 February 2012.