Calitz and Others v Minister of Police (62934/2014) [2021] ZAGPPHC 733 (29 October 2021)

Calitz and Others v Minister of Police (62934/2014) [2021] ZAGPPHC 733 (29 October 2021)

The court found that SAPS members were under a statutory duty, per Standing Order (G 341) and s 23 of the Criminal Procedure Act, to search the deceased for concealed weapons upon taking custody, even after a civilian arrest. However, the evidence established that the deceased had already been searched by an experienced security officer, who communicated this to the SAPS members and handed over confiscated items. There was no indication that the deceased was a suicide risk, nor evidence that a further search by SAPS would have discovered the concealed firearm. The court held that, although the SAPS members' omission constituted a dereliction of duty, it did not amount to negligence in the...

Citation
[2021] ZAGPPHC 733
Parties
Plaintiff: Jolandie Calitz and Two Others N.O.; Defendant: Minister of Police
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 October 2021
Case Number
62934/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Liability Only; Merits and Quantum Separated
Outcome
Plaintiffs' action dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
E van der Schyff
Legal Topics
Statutory Duty of Care, Negligence, Omission Liability, Causation, Search and Seizure
Delict Civil Procedure Statutory Duty of Care Negligence Omission Liability Causation Search and Seizure

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jolandie Calitz and Two Others N.O.

Plaintiff

Minister of Police

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Liability Only; Merits and Quantum Separated

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether SAPS members owed a statutory duty to search the deceased upon taking custody after a civilian arrest.
  2. 2 Whether the failure by SAPS members to search the deceased constituted negligence and was wrongful under the circumstances.
  3. 3 Whether the omission by SAPS members was the factual and legal cause of the deceased's death and plaintiffs' damages.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that SAPS members were under a statutory duty, per Standing Order (G 341) and s 23 of the Criminal Procedure Act, to search the deceased for concealed weapons upon taking custody, even after a civilian arrest. However, the evidence established that the deceased had already been searched by an experienced security officer, who communicated this to the SAPS members and handed over confiscated items. There was no indication that the deceased was a suicide risk, nor evidence that a further search by SAPS would have discovered the concealed firearm. The court held that, although the SAPS members' omission constituted a dereliction of duty, it did not amount to negligence in the...

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' action dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The plaintiffs' action is dismissed.
  • The plaintiffs are ordered to pay the defendant's costs, including the costs of two counsel.