South Africa Case Law

Reyneveldt obo Khethabahle v Minister of Safety and Security and Another (2012/33658)

Reyneveldt obo Khethabahle v Minister of Safety and Security and Another (2012/33658) [2024] ZAGPJHC 411 (25 April 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2012/33658

Judge

Moorcroft

A delict claim for an alleged police shooting during a protest failed because the plaintiff did not prove on a balance of probabilities that police caused the injury.

• Unlawful Police Conduct
• Rubber Bullet Injury
• Onus Of Proof
• Failure To Call Witnesses
• Adverse Inference
• Separation Of Liability And Quantum

Kgalane v Minister of Police (514/2022)

Kgalane v Minister of Police (514/2022) [2024] ZAFSHC 2 (5 January 2024)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

514/2022

Judge

Molitsoane

The court held the Minister of Police liable after finding that police officers shot the plaintiff with rubber bullets in the township, causing a leg injury.

• Actio Iniuriarum
• Bodily Integrity
• Negligence
• Vicarious Liability
• Rubber Bullet Injury
• Delict

Lehlehla v Minister of Police (13151/2014)

Lehlehla v Minister of Police (13151/2014) [2022] ZAWCHC 235; [2023] 1 All SA 438 (WCC) (17 November 2022)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

13151/2014

Judge

J I Cloete

The court found that the SAPS members were justified in firing rubber bullets due to necessity. They were hopelessly outnumbered by a violent crowd, had no access to alternative crowd control methods such as teargas or water cannons, and were compelled to act to protect life and property. The firing was not random or directed at the crowd but into the ground as trained, and there was no evidence of excessive force or direct targeting. The plaintiff, by entering the area of protest despite clear signs of unrest and gunfire, voluntarily assumed the risk of injury. The pleaded case did not estab…

Source excerpt

• Necessity
• Police Use Of Force
• Voluntary Assumption Of Risk
• Contributory Negligence
• Crowd Control
• Rubber Bullet Injury

Pretorius v Minister of Police (27250/2018)

Pretorius v Minister of Police (27250/2018) [2022] ZANCHC 62 (30 September 2022)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

27250/2018

Judge

Mamosebo

The High Court held the Minister of Police liable after finding that police negligently shot the plaintiff with a rubber bullet during a protest.

• State Liability Act
• Police Misconduct
• Rubber Bullet Injury
• Contributory Negligence
• Necessity Defence
• Volenti Non Fit Injuria

Daweti v Minister of Police (12327/2015)

Daweti v Minister of Police (12327/2015) [2020] ZAGPJHC 434 (10 July 2020)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

12327/2015

Judge

Yende

The High Court dismissed a claim that police shot the plaintiff in the eye with a rubber bullet during unrest at Ndlebende church, finding his version improbable and inconsistent.

• Negligent Shooting
• Rubber Bullet Injury
• Onus Of Proof
• Mutually Destructive Versions
• Assessment Of Evidence
• Delict

Lufuno v Minister of Police (547/2015)

Lufuno v Minister of Police (547/2015) [2017] ZALMPTHC 9 (6 July 2017)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Thohoyandou

Case number

547/2015

Judge

AML Phatudi

The court dismissed a damages claim against the Minister of Police after finding the plaintiff failed to prove police negligence in a rubber-bullet shooting.

• Negligence
• Duty Of Care
• Police Liability
• Rubber Bullet Injury
• Police-liability
• Rubber-bullet-injury

Mandhlaami v Minister of Police (7279/2013)

Mandhlaami v Minister of Police (7279/2013) [2017] ZAWCHC 33 (29 March 2017)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

7279/2013

Judge

Gamble

The court found that the police were lawfully deployed to restore public order during a violent and destructive strike in the Hex River Valley. The use of rubber bullets was justified as less forceful methods had proved ineffective or were unavailable. The police acted in accordance with statutory and standing order requirements, using force only when necessary and in a measured manner. The plaintiff's evidence regarding his whereabouts and conduct was questionable, but there was no direct evidence to contradict his claim that he was shot while not participating in the protest. Nevertheless,…

Source excerpt

• Public Order Policing
• Use Of Force
• Necessity
• Voluntary Assumption Of Risk
• Rubber Bullet Injury
• Crowd Management

Mlota v Minister of Police (65577/12)

Mlota v Minister of Police (65577/12) [2014] ZAGPPHC 311 (26 May 2014)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

65577/12

Judge

R M Keightley

The High Court dismissed a delict claim arising from a police rubber-bullet shooting during violent protests, finding the plaintiff failed to prove deliberate assault.

• Wrongful And Unlawful Assault
• Burden Of Proof
• Justification For Police Action
• Rubber Bullet Injury
• Delict
• Police-use-of-force