Minister of Safety and Security v Tyulu (327/2008) [2009] ZASCA 55; 2009 (5) SA 85 (SCA) ; 2009 (2) SACR 282 (SCA) ; [2009] 4 All SA 38 (SCA) (27 May 2009)

Minister of Safety and Security v Tyulu (327/2008) [2009] ZASCA 55; 2009 (5) SA 85 (SCA) ; 2009 (2) SACR 282 (SCA) ; [2009] 4 All SA 38 (SCA) (27 May 2009)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant failed to discharge the onus of proving that the respondent was drunk in public at the time of the first arrest. The evidence only established that the respondent may have been under the influence of alcohol, not that he was drunk as required by law. The arrest for being drunk in public was therefore unlawful. The second arrest for drunken driving was found to be lawful, as there were reasonable grounds for the police to believe the respondent had committed the offence. Regarding quantum, the court found that the award of R50,000 was excessive given the short duration of detention and the circumstances. Taking into account the...

Citation
[2009] ZASCA 55
Parties
Appellant: Minister of Safety and Security; Respondent: M Tyulu
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 May 2009
Case Number
327/2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Full Bench of High Court, Cape of Good Hope Provincial Division
Outcome
Appeal upheld in respect of quantum only; damages reduced.
Judges
Farlam, Van Heerden, Mhlantla, Bosielo, Tshiqi
Legal Topics
Unlawful Arrest, Quantum of Damages, Onus of Proof, Personal Liberty, Contumelia
Civil Procedure Delict Unlawful Arrest Quantum of Damages Onus of Proof Personal Liberty Contumelia

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Minister of Safety and Security

Appellant

M Tyulu

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Full Bench of High Court, Cape of Good Hope Provincial Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's first arrest for being drunk in public was lawful under s 40(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's second arrest for drunken driving was lawful under s 40(1)(f) of the Criminal Procedure Act.
  3. 3 What is the appropriate quantum of damages for unlawful arrest and detention.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant failed to discharge the onus of proving that the respondent was drunk in public at the time of the first arrest. The evidence only established that the respondent may have been under the influence of alcohol, not that he was drunk as required by law. The arrest for being drunk in public was therefore unlawful. The second arrest for drunken driving was found to be lawful, as there were reasonable grounds for the police to believe the respondent had committed the offence. Regarding quantum, the court found that the award of R50,000 was excessive given the short duration of detention and the circumstances. Taking into account the...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld in respect of quantum only; damages reduced.

Orders

  • The appeal is successful only in respect of the issue of quantum.
  • Part (b) of the order made by the Full Bench is set aside and substituted with: 'The defendant is ordered to pay the sum of R15,000 (fifteen thousand rand) to the plaintiff as damages.'