Mjali v Minister of Police (2223, 2226 & 2227/2016) [2020] ZAECMHC 49 (29 September 2020)

Mjali v Minister of Police (2223, 2226 & 2227/2016) [2020] ZAECMHC 49 (29 September 2020)

The court found that the plaintiffs were arrested and detained without a warrant and without reasonable suspicion of having committed any schedule 1 offence. The defendant failed to call the arresting officer to justify the arrest and did not provide evidence that the requirements of section 40(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act were met. The plaintiffs were not informed of the reasons for their arrest or detention, and the conditions of detention were degrading. The onus to justify the arrest and detention rested on the defendant, who failed to discharge it. The arrest and detention were therefore unlawful and constituted a violation of the plaintiffs' constitutional rights to dignity,...

Citation
[2020] ZAECMHC 49
Parties
Plaintiff: Lonwabo Mjali; Plaintiff: Thandolwenkosi Mjali; Plaintiff: Wanda Mjali; Defendant: Minister of Police
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 September 2020
Case Number
2223, 2226 & 2227/2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
The claims for unlawful arrest and detention by all three plaintiffs succeeded. The claim for malicious prosecution was dismissed.
Judges
N.R. Mtshabe
Legal Topics
Unlawful Arrest, Unlawful Detention, Damages for Injuria, Constitutional Rights, Onus of Justification, Quantum of Damages
Delict Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Unlawful Arrest Unlawful Detention Damages for Injuria Constitutional Rights Onus of Justification +1 more

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

Parties

Lonwabo Mjali

Plaintiff

Thandolwenkosi Mjali

Plaintiff

Wanda Mjali

Plaintiff

Minister of Police

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arrest and detention of the plaintiffs by members of the South African Police Service on 28 September 2014 was unlawful.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant discharged the onus of proving that the arrest and detention were justified in law under section 40(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to damages for unlawful arrest and detention, and the appropriate quantum thereof.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiffs were arrested and detained without a warrant and without reasonable suspicion of having committed any schedule 1 offence. The defendant failed to call the arresting officer to justify the arrest and did not provide evidence that the requirements of section 40(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act were met. The plaintiffs were not informed of the reasons for their arrest or detention, and the conditions of detention were degrading. The onus to justify the arrest and detention rested on the defendant, who failed to discharge it. The arrest and detention were therefore unlawful and constituted a violation of the plaintiffs' constitutional rights to dignity,...

Court Disposition

The claims for unlawful arrest and detention by all three plaintiffs succeeded. The claim for malicious prosecution was dismissed.

Orders

  • The defendant is ordered to pay Lonwabo Mjali the sum of R200,000 for unlawful arrest and detention.
  • The defendant is ordered to pay Thandolwenkosi Mjali the sum of R200,000 for unlawful arrest and detention.