Dobela and Another v Minister of Police (CA72/2017) [2017] ZAECMHC 50 (28 November 2017)

Dobela and Another v Minister of Police (CA72/2017) [2017] ZAECMHC 50 (28 November 2017)

The appellate court found that the trial court inadequately applied the principles for evaluating mutually destructive versions of evidence. Objective factors, including the position of the bush knife and shield, and the post mortem report, supported the appellants' version that the deceased was not armed and was shot while reaching for a shield. The respondent, bearing the onus, failed to provide credible and satisfactory evidence justifying the shooting as self-defence. The police officer's testimony was found to be defensive and implausible, lacking corroboration and consistency with objective evidence. The probabilities inherent in the appellants' version outweighed those of the...

Citation
[2017] ZAECMHC 50
Parties
Appellant: Thandelakhe Dobela; Appellant: Alindile Goqolo; Respondent: Minister of Police
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 November 2017
Case Number
CA72/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Damages Claim; Full Bench Hearing
Outcome
Appeal upheld; respondent found liable for damages arising from the death of the deceased.
Judges
RWN Brooks, BR Tokota, B Nomjana-Ndzondo
Legal Topics
Wrongful Death, Police Liability, Self Defence, Onus of Proof, Mutually Destructive Versions
Delict Civil Procedure Wrongful Death Police Liability Self Defence Onus of Proof Mutually Destructive Versions

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thandelakhe Dobela

Appellant

Alindile Goqolo

Appellant

Minister of Police

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Damages Claim; Full Bench Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the shooting of the deceased by a police officer was wrongful or justified as self-defence.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent discharged the onus of proving justification for the shooting.
  3. 3 Whether the trial court correctly applied the principles for evaluating mutually destructive versions of evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The appellate court found that the trial court inadequately applied the principles for evaluating mutually destructive versions of evidence. Objective factors, including the position of the bush knife and shield, and the post mortem report, supported the appellants' version that the deceased was not armed and was shot while reaching for a shield. The respondent, bearing the onus, failed to provide credible and satisfactory evidence justifying the shooting as self-defence. The police officer's testimony was found to be defensive and implausible, lacking corroboration and consistency with objective evidence. The probabilities inherent in the appellants' version outweighed those of the...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; respondent found liable for damages arising from the death of the deceased.

Orders

  • The appeal succeeds with costs, including costs occasioned by the use of two counsel.
  • The order of the trial court dated 21 February 2017 is set aside and replaced with an order that the defendant is liable to the plaintiffs for payment of such damages as may be proved or agreed to have arisen from the death of Bhekisisa Dobela.