Joubert v Griesel (11343/2004) [2008] ZAGPHC 200 (30 May 2008)

Joubert v Griesel (11343/2004) [2008] ZAGPHC 200 (30 May 2008)

The court found that the defendant, JC Griesel, was the complainant in the criminal proceedings against the plaintiff and that her sworn statement of 17 August 2001 was the direct cause of his arrest and prosecution. The evidence established that the defendant acted at least with dolus eventualis, knowing that her allegations could result in criminal prosecution. The defendant's denial of intent was contradicted by her own testimony and correspondence from her attorneys seeking further prosecution. The plaintiff proved all elements of malicious prosecution: the defendant instigated proceedings, lacked reasonable cause, acted with malice, and the prosecution terminated in his favour. The...

Citation
[2008] ZAGPHC 200
Parties
Plaintiff: GD Joubert; Defendant: JC Griesel
Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 May 2008
Case Number
11343/2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Final Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant is ordered to pay damages for legal costs, iniuria, and proven or agreed loss of income, as well as the costs of the action.
Judges
H J Fabricius
Legal Topics
Malicious Prosecution, Iniuria, Causation, Damages, Actio Iniuriarum
Delict Malicious Prosecution Iniuria Causation Damages Actio Iniuriarum

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

Parties

GD Joubert

Plaintiff

JC Griesel

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant maliciously instituted criminal proceedings against the plaintiff without reasonable grounds.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's conduct caused the plaintiff's arrest, prosecution, and resulting damages.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff proved all elements required for a claim of malicious prosecution under South African law.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant, JC Griesel, was the complainant in the criminal proceedings against the plaintiff and that her sworn statement of 17 August 2001 was the direct cause of his arrest and prosecution. The evidence established that the defendant acted at least with dolus eventualis, knowing that her allegations could result in criminal prosecution. The defendant's denial of intent was contradicted by her own testimony and correspondence from her attorneys seeking further prosecution. The plaintiff proved all elements of malicious prosecution: the defendant instigated proceedings, lacked reasonable cause, acted with malice, and the prosecution terminated in his favour. The...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant is ordered to pay damages for legal costs, iniuria, and proven or agreed loss of income, as well as the costs of the action.

Orders

  • The defendant must pay the plaintiff R35,227.14 for legal costs incurred due to the prosecution.
  • The defendant must pay the plaintiff R100,000.00 as general damages for iniuria.