Sello v Grobler and Others (623/2009) [2010] ZASCA 134; 2011 (1) SACR 310 (SCA) (1 October 2010)

Sello v Grobler and Others (623/2009) [2010] ZASCA 134; 2011 (1) SACR 310 (SCA) (1 October 2010)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the searches of the appellant's pharmacy and home on 8 July 2008 were unlawful, as they were conducted without a warrant and without proper statutory authorization. However, the appellant is not entitled to the return of all items seized, but only those he may lawfully possess. The court noted that some items, such as allegedly stolen goods and expired medication, cannot be returned, and some items may be required as evidence in pending criminal proceedings. The order was made for the respondents to return all items seized that the appellant may lawfully possess, and to pay costs jointly and severally.

Citation
[2010] ZASCA 134
Parties
Appellant: Abram Sello; Respondent: Inspector Grobler; Respondent: Inspector J Claasen; Respondent: Minister of Safety & Security; Respondent: National Director of Health, Medicine Regulatory Affairs, Inspectorate & Law Enforcement
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 October 2010
Case Number
623/2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From South Gauteng High Court (johannesburg)
Outcome
Appeal upheld with costs; order of the court below set aside and substituted.
Judges
MPATI, LEWIS, PONNAN, CACHALIA, K PILLAY
Legal Topics
Search and Seizure, Unlawful Search, Return of Seized Property, Criminal Procedure Act, Medicines and Related Substances Control Act
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Search and Seizure Unlawful Search Return of Seized Property Criminal Procedure Act Medicines and Related Substances Control Act

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abram Sello

Appellant

Inspector Grobler

Respondent

Inspector J Claasen

Respondent

Minister of Safety & Security

Respondent

National Director of Health, Medicine Regulatory Affairs, Inspectorate & Law Enforcement

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From South Gauteng High Court (johannesburg)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the searches of the appellant's pharmacy and home on 8 July 2008 were unlawful.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant is entitled to the return of all items seized during the unlawful searches.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant is lawfully entitled to possess all items seized.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the searches of the appellant's pharmacy and home on 8 July 2008 were unlawful, as they were conducted without a warrant and without proper statutory authorization. However, the appellant is not entitled to the return of all items seized, but only those he may lawfully possess. The court noted that some items, such as allegedly stolen goods and expired medication, cannot be returned, and some items may be required as evidence in pending criminal proceedings. The order was made for the respondents to return all items seized that the appellant may lawfully possess, and to pay costs jointly and severally.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld with costs; order of the court below set aside and substituted.

Orders

  • The respondents' searches of the appellant's pharmacy and home on 8 July 2008 are declared unlawful.
  • The respondents are directed forthwith to return to the appellant all items seized pursuant to those unlawful searches that the appellant may lawfully possess.