Minister of Law and Order v Monamodi (343/93) [1995] ZASCA 43 (30 March 1995)

Minister of Law and Order v Monamodi (343/93) [1995] ZASCA 43 (30 March 1995)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the respondent failed to discharge the onus of proving, on a balance of probabilities, that the police fired the shot that injured David Monamodi. The evidence did not establish sufficient objective facts to support the inference that the police were responsible for the injury. The trial judge's credibility findings were accepted, and the probabilities did not favour the respondent's version. The reasoning of the Full Bench was found to be flawed, as it relied on unsupported possibilities and rejected credible police evidence regarding their position and actions. The appeal was upheld, and the order of absolution from the instance with costs was...

Citation
[1995] ZASCA 43
Parties
Appellant: Minister of Law and Order; Respondent: Paulina Monamodi
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 March 1995
Case Number
343/93
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Full Bench of Transvaal Provincial Division
Outcome
Appeal upheld; order of absolution from the instance with costs restored.
Judges
Joubert, Hefer, Nienaber, Howie, Olivier
Legal Topics
Onus of Proof, Absolution From the Instance, Balance of Probabilities, Police Liability for Injury
Delict Civil Procedure Onus of Proof Absolution From the Instance Balance of Probabilities Police Liability for Injury

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Minister of Law and Order

Appellant

Paulina Monamodi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Full Bench of Transvaal Provincial Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent discharged the onus of proving that the police caused the injury to her son.
  2. 2 Whether the probabilities support the conclusion that the police fired the shot that injured David Monamodi.
  3. 3 Whether the trial court correctly ordered absolution from the instance.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the respondent failed to discharge the onus of proving, on a balance of probabilities, that the police fired the shot that injured David Monamodi. The evidence did not establish sufficient objective facts to support the inference that the police were responsible for the injury. The trial judge's credibility findings were accepted, and the probabilities did not favour the respondent's version. The reasoning of the Full Bench was found to be flawed, as it relied on unsupported possibilities and rejected credible police evidence regarding their position and actions. The appeal was upheld, and the order of absolution from the instance with costs was...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; order of absolution from the instance with costs restored.

Orders

  • The appeal succeeds with costs.
  • The order of the court a quo is set aside.