Mayeza and Others v Minister of Police and Another (165/2012) [2020] ZAECMHC 13 (5 May 2020)

Mayeza and Others v Minister of Police and Another (165/2012) [2020] ZAECMHC 13 (5 May 2020)

The court found that the second defendant, a police officer, shot and killed the deceased in circumstances where less harmful alternatives were available and where her actions exceeded the bounds of lawful self-defence. Although the deceased was advancing with a knife in a narrow, slippery passage, the second defendant failed to warn the deceased, fire a warning shot, or attempt to disarm him, despite being trained in such procedures. Her own concessions demonstrated that she panicked and did not act in accordance with her training or the standards expected of a reasonable police officer. Objectively, the force used was not necessary to ward off the attack, and the act of defence was more...

Citation
[2020] ZAECMHC 13
Parties
Plaintiff: Zwelethu Mayeza; Plaintiff: Zoleka Mayeza; Plaintiff: Ntomikayise Mayeza; Plaintiff: Ntandokazi Mayeza; Plaintiff: Onesimo Faku; Defendant: Minister of Police; Defendant: Unathi Ntantiso
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 May 2020
Case Number
165/2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Liability / Liability Separated From Quantum; Determination of Justification for Shooting
Outcome
The shooting of the deceased by the second defendant was wrongful and unlawful. The first defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiffs for any proven or agreed damages arising from the loss of support due to the wrongful shooting. The first defendant is also liable for the plaintiffs' costs of suit regarding...
Judges
Dawood
Legal Topics
Vicarious Liability, Wrongful Killing, Self Defence, Onus of Proof
Delict Civil Procedure Vicarious Liability Wrongful Killing Self Defence Onus of Proof

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zwelethu Mayeza

Plaintiff

Zoleka Mayeza

Plaintiff

Ntomikayise Mayeza

Plaintiff

Ntandokazi Mayeza

Plaintiff

Onesimo Faku

Plaintiff

Minister of Police

Defendant

Unathi Ntantiso

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Liability / Liability Separated From Quantum; Determination of Justification for Shooting

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the shooting and killing of the deceased by the second defendant justified in law?
  2. 2 Did the second defendant act in self-defence within the bounds permitted by law?
  3. 3 Is the first defendant vicariously liable for the actions of the second defendant?

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the second defendant, a police officer, shot and killed the deceased in circumstances where less harmful alternatives were available and where her actions exceeded the bounds of lawful self-defence. Although the deceased was advancing with a knife in a narrow, slippery passage, the second defendant failed to warn the deceased, fire a warning shot, or attempt to disarm him, despite being trained in such procedures. Her own concessions demonstrated that she panicked and did not act in accordance with her training or the standards expected of a reasonable police officer. Objectively, the force used was not necessary to ward off the attack, and the act of defence was more...

Court Disposition

The shooting of the deceased by the second defendant was wrongful and unlawful. The first defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiffs for any proven or agreed damages arising from the loss of support due to the wrongful shooting. The first defendant is also liable for the plaintiffs' costs of suit regarding...

Orders

  • The shooting of the deceased by the second defendant is found to be wrongful and unlawful.
  • The first defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiffs, subject to proof or agreement, for any damages in the form of loss of support arising from the wrongful shooting.