Ngwazi v Minister of Police (7990/2016) [2022] ZAKZDHC 53 (2 December 2022)

Ngwazi v Minister of Police (7990/2016) [2022] ZAKZDHC 53 (2 December 2022)

The court found that the plaintiff failed to discharge the onus of proving that his injury was the result of an unlawful and wrongful shooting by the police. The evidence established that the police were responding to an armed robbery and were fired upon by the suspects. The police returned fire in circumstances where it was reasonable and necessary to overcome resistance and prevent the suspects from fleeing, and their actions were justified on grounds of self-defence and necessity. Although it was probable that a stray bullet from the police may have caused the plaintiff's injury, the conduct of the police was not wrongful or unlawful given the threat posed and the need to protect...

Citation
[2022] ZAKZDHC 53
Parties
Plaintiff: Senzi Eric Ngwazi; Defendant: Minister of Police
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 December 2022
Case Number
7990/2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Liability Separated From Quantum; Judgment on Liability
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.
Judges
Marion
Legal Topics
Vicarious Liability, Wrongful Shooting, Use of Force, Self Defence, Criminal Procedure Act Section 49
Delict Criminal Law Vicarious Liability Wrongful Shooting Use of Force Self Defence Criminal Procedure Act Section 49

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 6 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Senzi Eric Ngwazi

Plaintiff

Minister of Police

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Liability Separated From Quantum; Judgment on Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether members of the SAPS wrongfully and unlawfully shot the plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether there were grounds for the SAPS members to discharge their firearms when they did.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff failed to discharge the onus of proving that his injury was the result of an unlawful and wrongful shooting by the police. The evidence established that the police were responding to an armed robbery and were fired upon by the suspects. The police returned fire in circumstances where it was reasonable and necessary to overcome resistance and prevent the suspects from fleeing, and their actions were justified on grounds of self-defence and necessity. Although it was probable that a stray bullet from the police may have caused the plaintiff's injury, the conduct of the police was not wrongful or unlawful given the threat posed and the need to protect...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The plaintiff’s claim is dismissed with costs.