Moloi v Minister of Police (3178/2021) [2023] ZAFSHC 478 (8 December 2023)

Moloi v Minister of Police (3178/2021) [2023] ZAFSHC 478 (8 December 2023)

The court found that the plaintiff failed to discharge the onus of proving, on a balance of probabilities, that her injuries were caused by a rubber bullet discharged by the police. There was no corroborating evidence, either from witnesses or hospital records, that her injuries were caused by a rubber bullet. The defendant's evidence that only reduced rubber bullets were used, which could not have caused such injuries, was not contradicted. Furthermore, the plaintiff knowingly placed herself in a volatile protest environment, thereby voluntarily assuming the risk of injury. The facts did not support liability on the part of the police, and the claim was dismissed.

Citation
[2023] ZAFSHC 478
Parties
Plaintiff: Keitumetse Joyce Moloi; Defendant: Minister of Police
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 December 2023
Case Number
3178/2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Merits Only; Quantum Separated
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.
Judges
Daniso
Legal Topics
Police Liability, Negligence, Assault, Voluntary Assumption of Risk
Delict Police Liability Negligence Assault Voluntary Assumption of Risk

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Keitumetse Joyce Moloi

Plaintiff

Minister of Police

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Merits Only; Quantum Separated

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff was injured by a rubber bullet discharged by the police.
  2. 2 Whether the police acted unlawfully or negligently in causing the plaintiff's injuries.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff voluntarily assumed the risk by placing herself in the area of protest.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff failed to discharge the onus of proving, on a balance of probabilities, that her injuries were caused by a rubber bullet discharged by the police. There was no corroborating evidence, either from witnesses or hospital records, that her injuries were caused by a rubber bullet. The defendant's evidence that only reduced rubber bullets were used, which could not have caused such injuries, was not contradicted. Furthermore, the plaintiff knowingly placed herself in a volatile protest environment, thereby voluntarily assuming the risk of injury. The facts did not support liability on the part of the police, and the claim was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The plaintiff’s claim is dismissed with costs.