South Africa Case Law

Dituku v National Director of Public Prosecutions (921/2019)

Dituku v National Director of Public Prosecutions (921/2019) [2024] ZANCHC 115 (6 September 2024)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

921/2019

Judge

MC Mamosebo

The court found that the plaintiff was prosecuted without reasonable and probable cause and that the prosecution was actuated by malice. The evidence relied upon by the NPA did not implicate the plaintiff in the theft or possession of stolen goats, and the prosecutor failed to objectively assess the available information. The statements of key witnesses exculpated the plaintiff, and the supposed owner of the goats denied ownership and involvement. The prosecutor proceeded with charges despite knowing that the elements of the offences could not be proven, demonstrating reckless disregard for t…

Source excerpt

• Malicious Prosecution
• Actio Injuriarum
• Stock Theft Act
• Reasonable And Probable Cause
• Animus Injuriandi
• Prosecutorial Discretion

Mene v Minister of Police (5640/2014)

Mene v Minister of Police (5640/2014) [2023] ZAECMHC 47 (5 September 2023)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

5640/2014

Judge

L L Sambudla

The High Court held the Minister of Police liable for unlawful arrest and detention of the plaintiff, awarding R650,000 plus interest and costs.

• Actio Injuriarum
• Unlawful Arrest
• Unlawful Detention
• Damages Assessment
• Onus Of Proof
• Unlawful-arrest

Serakwana v Minister of Police (2014/39550)

Serakwana v Minister of Police (2014/39550) [2023] ZAGPJHC 315 (3 April 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2014/39550

Judge

Mabuse

The court found that the Defendant failed to establish reasonable grounds for the Plaintiff's arrest under section 40(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The medical evidence (J88) did not record any open or dangerous wound on the complainant, undermining the basis for suspicion of a Schedule 1 offence. The arresting officer's subjective belief was not supported by objective facts. The Plaintiff's detention conditions were deplorable, with lack of adequate accommodation and nutrition, violating section 35(2)(e) of the Constitution. The Plaintiff was deprived of liberty for over 12 hours in i…

Source excerpt

• Unlawful Arrest
• Unlawful Detention
• Actio Injuriarum
• Section 12 Constitution
• Section 35 Constitution
• Quantum Of Damages

Thokozani v Minister of Police (30337/2015)

Thokozani v Minister of Police (30337/2015) [2022] ZAGPJHC 955 (30 November 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

30337/2015

Judge

M B Mahalelo

The High Court awarded R100,000 for unlawful arrest and detention after the defendant conceded liability, leaving only damages and costs in issue.

• Unlawful Arrest
• Unlawful Detention
• Quantum Of Damages
• Actio Injuriarum
• Unlawful-arrest
• Unlawful-detention

Shabangu v Minister of Police (66113/2019)

Shabangu v Minister of Police (66113/2019) [2022] ZAGPPHC 590 (15 August 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

66113/2019

Judge

Baqwa

High Court dismissal of an unlawful arrest and detention claim after finding reasonable suspicion under section 40(1)(b) of the CPA.

• Unlawful Arrest
• Detention
• Actio Injuriarum
• Section 40 Criminal Procedure Act
• Onus Of Proof
• Unlawful-arrest

Pinkie v Commissioner of the South African Police and Another (59340/16)

Pinkie v Commissioner of the South African Police and Another (59340/16) [2017] ZAGPPHC 939 (30 March 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

59340/16

Judge

Sibuyi

The High Court dismissed an unopposed claim against police for constitutional damages and contumelia, finding no pleaded right or actionable delict.

• Constitutional Damages
• Actio Injuriarum
• Contumelia
• Wrongful Omission
• Police Duties
• Constitutional-damages

Maputle and Others v Premier, Mpumalanga Provincial Government and Another (09/69046)

Maputle and Others v Premier, Mpumalanga Provincial Government and Another (09/69046) [2014] ZAGPPHC 843 (10 October 2014)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

09/69046

Judge

Mashile

The High Court dismissed a claimed dignity and contract-action arising from suspensions over scholar transport irregularities and alleged press publication.

• Suspension Of Employees
• Breach Of Employment Contract
• Actio Injuriarum
• Resolution 1 Of 2003 Pscbc
• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Hearsay Evidence

Sithole v Minister of Safety and Security and Others (7882/2003)

Sithole v Minister of Safety and Security and Others (7882/2003) [2013] ZAKZDHC 55 (11 October 2013)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

7882/2003

Judge

Lopes

The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish on a balance of probabilities that his arrest was wrongful, that he was assaulted by the third defendant, or that the prosecution was malicious. The evidence demonstrated that there was reasonable and probable cause for the arrest and prosecution, based on the statements and circumstances surrounding the theft from Warrant Officer Chiliza's flat. The plaintiff's version was contradicted by documentary evidence and the testimony of defence witnesses, and his credibility was undermined by inconsistencies and improbabilities in his account.…

Source excerpt

• Wrongful Arrest
• Malicious Prosecution
• Assault
• Damages
• Actio Injuriarum

South African National Defence Union v Minister of Defence and Others (19949/2008)

South African National Defence Union v Minister of Defence and Others (19949/2008) [2013] ZAGPPHC 232 (1 August 2013)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

19949/2008

Judge

M R Chetty

The court held that two military publications defamed SANDU by falsely portraying it as dishonest and distributing a counterfeit salary agreement.

• Defamation
• Trade Union Reputation
• Military Labour Relations
• Actio Injuriarum
• Trade-union-law
• Military-labour-relations

Cele v Avusa Media Ltd (08/10831)

Cele v Avusa Media Ltd (08/10831) [2013] ZAGPJHC 15; [2013] 2 All SA 412 (GSJ) (14 February 2013)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

08/10831

Judge

Kathree-Setiloane

The court found that the articles and altered photo image, when read in context, were not defamatory of the plaintiff. The reasonable reader would interpret the plaintiff's statements and the image as advocating a tough stance against violent crime, not as incitement to murder or indiscriminate violence. The plaintiff, as a public figure, was expected to tolerate robust criticism and satire. The altered photo image was a parodic representation and did not infringe the plaintiff's dignity, as a reasonable politician in his position would not have been hurt by its publication. The publication o…

Source excerpt

• Defamation
• Dignity Infringement
• Actio Injuriarum
• Reasonable Publication
• Fair Comment
• Freedom Of Expression