Mngomezulu v Minister of Police (10618/2016) [2018] ZAGPJHC 524 (13 September 2018)

Mngomezulu v Minister of Police (10618/2016) [2018] ZAGPJHC 524 (13 September 2018)

The court found the plaintiff's version improbable, noting that it was unlikely a police officer would have approached and shot the plaintiff in the manner described, especially in a large crowd during a protest. The police evidence was consistent, corroborated by official reports, and supported by the fact that only stun grenades and rubber bullets were issued and used. The injuries described by the plaintiff were inconsistent with the effects of rubber bullets or pellet ammunition at close range. The disruption of transport in the area further indicated the protest was not peaceful, contrary to the plaintiff's account. On a balance of probabilities, the court held that the plaintiff...

Citation
[2018] ZAGPJHC 524
Parties
Plaintiff: Kusa Richard Mngomezulu; Defendant: Minister of Police
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 September 2018
Case Number
10618/2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Liability Separated From Quantum; Determination of Liability Only
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.
Judges
Millar
Legal Topics
Police Liability, Personal Injury, Onus of Proof, Mutually Destructive Versions
Delict Police Liability Personal Injury Onus of Proof Mutually Destructive Versions

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kusa Richard Mngomezulu

Plaintiff

Minister of Police

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Liability Separated From Quantum; Determination of Liability Only

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff was shot in the hand by a police officer using pellet ammunition during a protest on 12 July 2014.
  2. 2 Whether the police used pellet ammunition or only stun grenades and rubber bullets.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff discharged the onus of proof on a balance of probabilities.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the plaintiff's version improbable, noting that it was unlikely a police officer would have approached and shot the plaintiff in the manner described, especially in a large crowd during a protest. The police evidence was consistent, corroborated by official reports, and supported by the fact that only stun grenades and rubber bullets were issued and used. The injuries described by the plaintiff were inconsistent with the effects of rubber bullets or pellet ammunition at close range. The disruption of transport in the area further indicated the protest was not peaceful, contrary to the plaintiff's account. On a balance of probabilities, the court held that the plaintiff...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The plaintiff's claim is dismissed with costs.