Chagi and Others v Special Investigating Unit (89/07) [2007] ZASCA 159; [2008] 2 All SA 8 (SCA); 2008 (1) SACR 329 (SCA); 2008 (7) BCLR 697 (SCA) (29 November 2007)

Chagi and Others v Special Investigating Unit (89/07) [2007] ZASCA 159; [2008] 2 All SA 8 (SCA); 2008 (1) SACR 329 (SCA); 2008 (7) BCLR 697 (SCA) (29 November 2007)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the second Special Investigating Unit, established by Proclamation R118 of 2001, is a distinct juristic entity from the first SIU. The Proclamation did not expressly or by necessary implication provide for the transfer of rights or liabilities from the first SIU to the second. The continuity of investigations did not create a legal nexus for succession of liability. The Act permits the establishment of multiple SIUs, each with separate legal personality, and liability for the wrongful acts of one does not devolve upon another. The Legislature could have expressly provided for succession of liability but did not do so. The proper remedy for the...

Citation
[2007] ZASCA 159
Parties
Appellant: Wilmot Mandla Chagi & 29 Others; Respondent: Special Investigating Unit
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 November 2007
Case Number
89/07
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court; Special Plea Upheld Below
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
NAVSA, BRAND, JAFTA, PONNAN, COMBRINCK
Legal Topics
Successor Liability, Special Investigating Units Act, State Liability, Defamation, Malicious Prosecution
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Successor Liability Special Investigating Units Act State Liability Defamation Malicious Prosecution

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wilmot Mandla Chagi & 29 Others

Appellant

Special Investigating Unit

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court; Special Plea Upheld Below

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether liability for the alleged wrongful acts of the first Special Investigating Unit devolved upon the second Special Investigating Unit.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent, as the newly established SIU, could be sued for acts committed by its predecessor.
  3. 3 Whether the appellants had a remedy against the State for the alleged wrongful acts.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the second Special Investigating Unit, established by Proclamation R118 of 2001, is a distinct juristic entity from the first SIU. The Proclamation did not expressly or by necessary implication provide for the transfer of rights or liabilities from the first SIU to the second. The continuity of investigations did not create a legal nexus for succession of liability. The Act permits the establishment of multiple SIUs, each with separate legal personality, and liability for the wrongful acts of one does not devolve upon another. The Legislature could have expressly provided for succession of liability but did not do so. The proper remedy for the...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.