Mlota v Minister of Police (65577/12) [2014] ZAGPPHC 311 (26 May 2014)

Mlota v Minister of Police (65577/12) [2014] ZAGPPHC 311 (26 May 2014)

The court found that the applicant failed to establish, on the probabilities, that he was deliberately and intentionally shot by a police officer standing at the entrance to the yard. The applicant's version was inconsistent and contradicted by his own witnesses and documentary evidence. The evidence indicated that the police fired rubber bullets from inside an armoured vehicle to disperse a violent crowd during ongoing protest action, and the applicant was either part of the protest or caught in the crossfire. The police conduct was justified under the circumstances and proportionate to the threat posed. As the applicant pleaded only a deliberate shooting and did not advance an...

Citation
[2014] ZAGPPHC 311
Parties
Applicant: Kleinbooi Matthews Mlota; Respondent: Minister of Police
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 May 2014
Case Number
65577/12
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Merits Only; Quantum Separated by Agreement
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.
Judges
R M Keightley
Legal Topics
Wrongful and Unlawful Assault, Burden of Proof, Justification for Police Action, Rubber Bullet Injury
Delict Civil Procedure Wrongful and Unlawful Assault Burden of Proof Justification for Police Action Rubber Bullet 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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kleinbooi Matthews Mlota

Applicant

Minister of Police

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Merits Only; Quantum Separated by Agreement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff was deliberately and intentionally shot by a police officer with rubber bullets.
  2. 2 Whether the shooting constituted a wrongful and unlawful assault by the police.
  3. 3 Whether the police action was justified under the circumstances of violent protest.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to establish, on the probabilities, that he was deliberately and intentionally shot by a police officer standing at the entrance to the yard. The applicant's version was inconsistent and contradicted by his own witnesses and documentary evidence. The evidence indicated that the police fired rubber bullets from inside an armoured vehicle to disperse a violent crowd during ongoing protest action, and the applicant was either part of the protest or caught in the crossfire. The police conduct was justified under the circumstances and proportionate to the threat posed. As the applicant pleaded only a deliberate shooting and did not advance an...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The plaintiff’s claim is dismissed.
  • The plaintiff is directed to pay the defendant’s costs.