Sheffrk v MEC for Police, Road and Transport Free State Province (4603/2015) [2022] ZAFSHC 142 (3 June 2022)

Sheffrk v MEC for Police, Road and Transport Free State Province (4603/2015) [2022] ZAFSHC 142 (3 June 2022)

The court found that the letters D208 and D209 are hearsay and opinion evidence, the probative value of which depends on the credibility of the authors, who will not be called to testify. Both parties refused to consult or call the witnesses, undermining the ability to test the veracity of the evidence as required by the constitutional imperative of a fair trial. The documents are general, not time-specific, and do not address the condition of the road at the precise location and date of the accident. The court held that discovered documents are admissible as real evidence but their contents are not automatically accepted as true or authentic unless the author testifies or the opposing...

Citation
[2022] ZAFSHC 142
Parties
Applicant: Garth Wayne Sheffryk; Respondent: MEC for Police, Roads and Transport: Free State Province
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 June 2022
Case Number
4603/2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Interlocutory Application / Application for Admissibility of Hearsay Evidence in Ongoing Civil Trial
Outcome
Application to admit letters D208 and D209 as hearsay evidence on the merits denied; letters admitted as real evidence for costs inquiry only; costs of application to be costs in the cause.
Judges
Opperman
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Hearsay Evidence, Documentary Evidence, Opinion Evidence, Law of Evidence Amendment Act, Costs in Civil Procedure
Civil Procedure Admissibility of Hearsay Evidence Documentary Evidence Opinion Evidence Law of Evidence Amendment Act Costs in Civil Procedure

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Garth Wayne Sheffryk

Applicant

MEC for Police, Roads and Transport: Free State Province

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Interlocutory Application / Application for Admissibility of Hearsay Evidence in Ongoing Civil Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether letters D208 and D209, containing hearsay and opinion evidence, are admissible as evidence on the merits of the civil trial.
  2. 2 Whether the discovered documents may be admitted for the purpose of the inquiry into costs.
  3. 3 Whether the refusal by both parties to call or consult the authors of the documents affects admissibility.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the letters D208 and D209 are hearsay and opinion evidence, the probative value of which depends on the credibility of the authors, who will not be called to testify. Both parties refused to consult or call the witnesses, undermining the ability to test the veracity of the evidence as required by the constitutional imperative of a fair trial. The documents are general, not time-specific, and do not address the condition of the road at the precise location and date of the accident. The court held that discovered documents are admissible as real evidence but their contents are not automatically accepted as true or authentic unless the author testifies or the opposing...

Court Disposition

Application to admit letters D208 and D209 as hearsay evidence on the merits denied; letters admitted as real evidence for costs inquiry only; costs of application to be costs in the cause.

Orders

  • The application that the letters D208 and D209 be regarded as admissible hearsay evidence under section 3(1)(c) of the Law of Evidence Amendment Act 45 of 1988 on the merits of the case is denied.
  • The letters D208 and D209 are regarded as admissible as real evidence for the purpose of the inquiry into costs.