Zide v Xhobani Security Services and Another (CA 50/2023) [2025] ZAECMHC 5 (11 February 2025)

Zide v Xhobani Security Services and Another (CA 50/2023) [2025] ZAECMHC 5 (11 February 2025)

The court found that the appellant's evidence was contradictory, unreliable, and tailored to avoid placing herself among the protesting students. The probabilities, assessed against the totality of the evidence, favoured the respondents' version that the appellant was shot while in the vicinity of violent protestors, not inside Chumani residence as she claimed. The respondents' use of rubber bullets and ceramic balls was justified under private defence and necessity, given the imminent threat posed by the large, armed group of students. The appellant, by knowingly placing herself in a dangerous situation, implicitly consented to the risk of injury. The respondents established the defence...

Citation
[2025] ZAECMHC 5
Parties
Appellant: Zizipho Bridgette Zide; Respondent: Xhobani Security Services; Respondent: Falcon Firearm Training Academy
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 February 2025
Case Number
CA 50/2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Dismissal of Claim on Merits
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Rusi, GNZ Mjali, MS Jolwana
Legal Topics
Personal Injury, Volenti Non Fit Injuria, Private Defence, Credibility of Single Witness, Apportionment of Damages Act, Vicarious Liability
Delict Civil Procedure Personal Injury Volenti Non Fit Injuria Private Defence Credibility of Single Witness Apportionment of Damages Act Vicarious Liability

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zizipho Bridgette Zide

Appellant

Xhobani Security Services

Respondent

Falcon Firearm Training Academy

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Dismissal of Claim on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the appellant's evidence as unreliable and lacking credibility.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant proved, on a balance of probabilities, that she was unlawfully or negligently shot by a security guard employed by the respondents.
  3. 3 Whether the respondents' use of force was justified under private defence or necessity.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant's evidence was contradictory, unreliable, and tailored to avoid placing herself among the protesting students. The probabilities, assessed against the totality of the evidence, favoured the respondents' version that the appellant was shot while in the vicinity of violent protestors, not inside Chumani residence as she claimed. The respondents' use of rubber bullets and ceramic balls was justified under private defence and necessity, given the imminent threat posed by the large, armed group of students. The appellant, by knowingly placing herself in a dangerous situation, implicitly consented to the risk of injury. The respondents established the defence...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs on scale A as per Uniform Rule 67A, including costs of 05 February 2024.