Tengile v Minister of Police (39/2018) [2019] ZAECMHC 65 (12 November 2019)

Tengile v Minister of Police (39/2018) [2019] ZAECMHC 65 (12 November 2019)

The court found that the plaintiff's evidence of assault by police officers was clear, credible, and uncontradicted, as the defendant failed to lead any evidence to dispute the plaintiff's version. The defendant's reliance on justification under Section 49(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act was unsupported by evidence, and the jurisdictional facts required by the section were not established. Consequently, the plaintiff succeeded in proving the assault, and the defendant was held liable for damages arising from the assault. Costs were awarded to the plaintiff, following the general rule that costs follow the result.

Citation
[2019] ZAECMHC 65
Parties
Plaintiff: Xolile Tengile; Defendant: Minister of Police
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 November 2019
Case Number
1803/2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Liability Determination for Assault Claim
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim for assault succeeds; defendant held liable for proven or agreed damages.
Judges
A.S. Zono
Legal Topics
Unlawful Arrest, Assault by Police, Onus of Proof, Justification for Force
Delict Civil Procedure Unlawful Arrest Assault by Police Onus of Proof Justification for Force

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

Xolile Tengile

Plaintiff

Minister of Police

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Liability Determination for Assault Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff was assaulted by members of the South African Police Service.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant is liable for damages arising from the assault.
  3. 3 Whether the defendant proved justification for the use of force.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff's evidence of assault by police officers was clear, credible, and uncontradicted, as the defendant failed to lead any evidence to dispute the plaintiff's version. The defendant's reliance on justification under Section 49(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act was unsupported by evidence, and the jurisdictional facts required by the section were not established. Consequently, the plaintiff succeeded in proving the assault, and the defendant was held liable for damages arising from the assault. Costs were awarded to the plaintiff, following the general rule that costs follow the result.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim for assault succeeds; defendant held liable for proven or agreed damages.

Orders

  • Plaintiff's claim for assault succeeds.
  • The defendant is held liable to the plaintiff for proven or agreed damages consequent upon plaintiff's assault by members of the defendant on 3 June 2012.