Jack v Minister of Police (1100/2014) [2019] ZAECPEHC 28 (14 May 2019)

Jack v Minister of Police (1100/2014) [2019] ZAECPEHC 28 (14 May 2019)

The court found, on a balance of probabilities, that the plaintiff was struck by a rubber bullet discharged by a member of the South African Police Service. The evidence of the plaintiff and her witnesses was credible and corroborated by independent witnesses who confirmed the police were armed and fired at the crowd. The defendant's version was found to be improbable and unreliable, as it was unlikely that a public order police unit would approach a large, unruly crowd without protective gear and rubber bullets. The defendant failed to discharge the onus of proving contributory negligence. The quantum of damages was admitted by the defendant, and the plaintiff was justified in...

Citation
[2019] ZAECPEHC 28
Parties
Plaintiff: Jeanette Jack; Defendant: Minister of Police
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 May 2019
Case Number
1100/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Judgment entered in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant for payment of damages and costs.
Judges
NG Beshe
Legal Topics
Vicarious Liability, Negligence, Personal Injury, Quantum of Damages, Contributory Negligence
Delict Civil Procedure Vicarious Liability Negligence Personal Injury Quantum of Damages Contributory Negligence

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jeanette Jack

Plaintiff

Minister of Police

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's injury was caused by a rubber bullet discharged by a member of the South African Police Service.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant is vicariously liable for the conduct of its employee.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff was contributorily negligent in the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found, on a balance of probabilities, that the plaintiff was struck by a rubber bullet discharged by a member of the South African Police Service. The evidence of the plaintiff and her witnesses was credible and corroborated by independent witnesses who confirmed the police were armed and fired at the crowd. The defendant's version was found to be improbable and unreliable, as it was unlikely that a public order police unit would approach a large, unruly crowd without protective gear and rubber bullets. The defendant failed to discharge the onus of proving contributory negligence. The quantum of damages was admitted by the defendant, and the plaintiff was justified in...

Court Disposition

Judgment entered in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant for payment of damages and costs.

Orders

  • The defendant shall pay the plaintiff R204,968.56.
  • The defendant shall be liable for interest at the prescribed legal rate from fourteen days after the date of judgment to date of payment.