Modise v Minister of Safety and Security (18346/14) [2021] ZAGPPHC 561 (2 September 2021)

Modise v Minister of Safety and Security (18346/14) [2021] ZAGPPHC 561 (2 September 2021)

The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case against the defendant. The plaintiff could not identify who shot her, nor did she provide objective facts or evidence from which a reasonable inference could be drawn that the police were responsible for her injuries. The expert evidence was inconclusive and did not directly link the bullet to police firearms. The court held that any finding attributing the shooting to the police would be speculative rather than inferential. Accordingly, the application for absolution from the instance was granted.

Citation
[2021] ZAGPPHC 561
Parties
Plaintiff: Rose Mmemme Kedisaletse Modise; Defendant: Minister of Safety and Security
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 September 2021
Case Number
18346/14
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Application for Absolution From the Instance at Close of Plaintiff's Case
Outcome
Application for absolution from the instance granted; plaintiff's claim dismissed without costs.
Judges
Mabuse
Legal Topics
Negligence, Vicarious Liability, Absolution From the Instance, Prima Facie Case, Circumstantial Evidence
Delict Negligence Vicarious Liability Absolution From the Instance Prima Facie Case Circumstantial Evidence

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rose Mmemme Kedisaletse Modise

Plaintiff

Minister of Safety and Security

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Application for Absolution From the Instance at Close of Plaintiff's Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff established a prima facie case that members of the South African Police negligently caused her injuries.
  2. 2 Whether the evidence supports a reasonable inference that the police were responsible for the shooting.
  3. 3 Whether absolution from the instance should be granted at the close of the plaintiff's case.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case against the defendant. The plaintiff could not identify who shot her, nor did she provide objective facts or evidence from which a reasonable inference could be drawn that the police were responsible for her injuries. The expert evidence was inconclusive and did not directly link the bullet to police firearms. The court held that any finding attributing the shooting to the police would be speculative rather than inferential. Accordingly, the application for absolution from the instance was granted.

Court Disposition

Application for absolution from the instance granted; plaintiff's claim dismissed without costs.

Orders

  • The application for absolution from the instance is granted.
  • Absolution from the instance is ordered.