Funde v Minister of Police (905/2010) [2012] ZAECPEHC 92 (11 December 2012)

Funde v Minister of Police (905/2010) [2012] ZAECPEHC 92 (11 December 2012)

The court found the plaintiff's evidence credible and consistent, while the police officers' version was equivocal, contradictory, and unsupported by documentary evidence. The court rejected the defendant's claim that the plaintiff gave permission for the search and found that the police unlawfully entered and searched the plaintiff's home. The court further found that the plaintiff was assaulted and tortured by the police, suffering a severe invasion of privacy and emotional trauma. The police officers' reasons for handcuffing and assaulting the plaintiff were found to be fabricated and unjustified. The court held that the plaintiff proved his claim on a balance of probabilities and was...

Citation
[2012] ZAECPEHC 92
Parties
Plaintiff: Thobela Julius Funde; Defendant: Minister of Police
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 December 2012
Case Number
905/2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim for damages for invasion of privacy and assault is upheld.
Judges
J M Roberson
Legal Topics
Invasion of Privacy, Assault by Police, Damages for Torture, Constitutional Rights Violation
Delict Constitutional Law Invasion of Privacy Assault by Police Damages for Torture Constitutional Rights Violation

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thobela Julius Funde

Plaintiff

Minister of Police

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the police unlawfully entered and searched the plaintiff's home without his permission.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff was assaulted and tortured by police officers during the search and arrest.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to damages for invasion of privacy and assault.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the plaintiff's evidence credible and consistent, while the police officers' version was equivocal, contradictory, and unsupported by documentary evidence. The court rejected the defendant's claim that the plaintiff gave permission for the search and found that the police unlawfully entered and searched the plaintiff's home. The court further found that the plaintiff was assaulted and tortured by the police, suffering a severe invasion of privacy and emotional trauma. The police officers' reasons for handcuffing and assaulting the plaintiff were found to be fabricated and unjustified. The court held that the plaintiff proved his claim on a balance of probabilities and was...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim for damages for invasion of privacy and assault is upheld.

Orders

  • The defendant is ordered to pay the plaintiff damages in the sum of R110,000.00, together with interest at the legal rate from the date of service of summons to the date of payment.
  • The defendant is ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs of the action, together with interest at the legal rate from 14 days after the date of allocatur to the date of payment.