Ziboti and Another v Minister of Police and Others (3286/2024) [2024] ZAECQBHC 57 (19 September 2024)

Ziboti and Another v Minister of Police and Others (3286/2024) [2024] ZAECQBHC 57 (19 September 2024)

The court found that the respondents failed to comply with the statutory requirements for search and seizure under Section 101(2) of the Correctional Services Act. The applicants, as correctional officials, did not consent to the search, and no authorisation was obtained from the National Commissioner. The Security Intelligence Report from the Area Commissioner did not constitute valid authorisation. The seizure of the applicants' cellular phones was therefore unlawful and void. The applicants satisfied the requirements for mandament van spolie, having been in possession and unlawfully deprived of their property. The court held that the respondents' conduct amounted to an abuse of power...

Citation
[2024] ZAECQBHC 57
Parties
Applicant: Lufefe Ziboti; Applicant: Babalwa Ndwalane; Respondent: Minister of Police; Respondent: Station Commander, Kabega Police Station; Respondent: Minister of Correctional Services; Respondent: Area Commissioner: Correctional Services; Respondent: Head of Medium B, St Albans Correctional Centre
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Gqeberha
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 September 2024
Case Number
3286/2024
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Part A: Urgent Application for Return of Property
Outcome
Application granted with costs on a punitive attorney and client scale.
Judges
A S Zono
Legal Topics
Mandament Van Spolie, Search and Seizure, Doctrine of Legality, Statutory Interpretation, Constitutional Rights, Abuse of Power
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Mandament Van Spolie Search and Seizure Doctrine of Legality Statutory Interpretation Constitutional Rights Abuse of Power

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lufefe Ziboti

Applicant

Babalwa Ndwalane

Applicant

Minister of Police

Respondent

Station Commander, Kabega Police Station

Respondent

Minister of Correctional Services

Respondent

Area Commissioner: Correctional Services

Respondent

Head of Medium B, St Albans Correctional Centre

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Part A: Urgent Application for Return of Property

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the seizure of the applicants' cellular phones was lawful under the Correctional Services Act.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents complied with statutory requirements for search and seizure of property belonging to correctional officials.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants are entitled to the mandament van spolie remedy for restoration of possession.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondents failed to comply with the statutory requirements for search and seizure under Section 101(2) of the Correctional Services Act. The applicants, as correctional officials, did not consent to the search, and no authorisation was obtained from the National Commissioner. The Security Intelligence Report from the Area Commissioner did not constitute valid authorisation. The seizure of the applicants' cellular phones was therefore unlawful and void. The applicants satisfied the requirements for mandament van spolie, having been in possession and unlawfully deprived of their property. The court held that the respondents' conduct amounted to an abuse of power...

Court Disposition

Application granted with costs on a punitive attorney and client scale.

Orders

  • Applicants' noncompliance with form and time limits for service is condoned; application heard as urgent under Rule 6(12) of the Uniform Rules of Court.
  • First and second respondents are directed to forthwith return to the applicants two cellular phones, namely a Samsung S23 and a Samsung S21.