Masente v Minister of Police (22/2747) [2025] ZAGPJHC 569 (6 June 2025)

Masente v Minister of Police (22/2747) [2025] ZAGPJHC 569 (6 June 2025)

The court found that Masente failed to discharge the onus of proof regarding the alleged theft of R400,000 by SAPS officers. His evidence was inconsistent, lacked corroboration from key witnesses such as his wife and father, and was unsupported by documentary records of business turnover or banking. The absence of a proper bookkeeping system and failure to subpoena suppliers further undermined his case. The police witnesses, despite some contradictions, denied any knowledge of the alleged stolen monies and maintained that only R49,880 was seized and returned. The court concluded that suspicions alone are insufficient for a finding in favour of the plaintiff, and the claim for damages must...

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 569
Parties
Plaintiff: Sibusiso Masente; Defendant: Minister of Police
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 June 2025
Case Number
22/2747
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.
Judges
S Van Nieuwenhuizen
Legal Topics
Wrongful Arrest, Unlawful Detention, Damages for Loss, Burden of Proof, Police Misconduct
Civil Procedure Delict Wrongful Arrest Unlawful Detention Damages for Loss Burden of Proof Police Misconduct

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

Parties

Sibusiso Masente

Plaintiff

Minister of Police

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff proved that SAPS officers stole R400,000 during his arrest.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff established ownership or bona fide possession of the alleged stolen monies.
  3. 3 Whether the police search and arrest were lawful under the Disaster Management Regulations and other statutes.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Masente failed to discharge the onus of proof regarding the alleged theft of R400,000 by SAPS officers. His evidence was inconsistent, lacked corroboration from key witnesses such as his wife and father, and was unsupported by documentary records of business turnover or banking. The absence of a proper bookkeeping system and failure to subpoena suppliers further undermined his case. The police witnesses, despite some contradictions, denied any knowledge of the alleged stolen monies and maintained that only R49,880 was seized and returned. The court concluded that suspicions alone are insufficient for a finding in favour of the plaintiff, and the claim for damages must...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The plaintiff's case is dismissed with costs of one counsel on scale B.
  • The defendant is ordered to pay the plaintiff's wasted costs for 2.5 days pertaining to the failed application for a postponement.