Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Hufkie v Minister of Police - Appeal (CA98/2023) [2023] ZAECMKHC 123 (7 November 2023)
The High Court dismissed an appeal in a damages claim arising from police shooting during a hijacking chase, finding no material misdirection in the trial court’s credibility findings.
Rabothata v Minister of Police (56775/19) [2021] ZAGPPHC 511; 2021 (2) SACR 544 (GP) (12 August 2021)
The High Court held that police wrongly shot the plaintiff during an attempted arrest, rejected the section 49(2) defence, and found the Minister vicariously liable.
Mathekga and Another v S (717/2019) [2020] ZASCA 77; [2020] 3 All SA 681 (SCA) ; 2020 (2) SACR 559 (SCA) (30 June 2020)
Police officers who shot at fellow officers were convicted of murder; the appeal against conviction failed, but sentence was reduced to 13 years each.
Ndima v Minister of Police (16852/2013) [2015] ZAGPJHC 101 (5 June 2015)
The court found the Plaintiff to be a credible and reliable witness, corroborated by the taxi driver. The Defendant's police witnesses contradicted each other and failed to provide a plausible or consistent account justifying the shooting, arrest, and detention. The Defendant did not discharge the onus to prove justification for the infringement of the Plaintiff's bodily integrity or the lawfulness of the arrest and detention. The evidence did not support the police version that the Plaintiff posed a threat or was in possession of a firearm. The shooting was unnecessary and unjustified, and t…
Source excerpt
Levendal v Balakrishma (CA412/2008) [2009] ZAECGHC 50 (7 August 2009)
The High Court upheld an appeal after a man shot a fleeing suspect; it found the shooting wrongful and negligent and held the respondent liable for damages.
Khoza and Another v Minister of Safety and Security and Another (7369/06) [2009] ZAKZDHC 22 (22 June 2009)
The court found that the police acted reasonably and proportionally in the circumstances, given the evidence that the plaintiff and his companion were armed and fired at the police. The police were justified in using deadly force under Section 49 of the Criminal Procedure Act, as the suspects posed an immediate threat to the safety of the officers and the public. The expert evidence indicated that the plaintiff's injuries were more likely caused by a ricocheted bullet fired by his companion, not by the police. The absence of firearms and gunpowder residue was explained by the terrain and the…
Source excerpt
April v Minister of Safety and Security (79/07) [2008] ZAECHC 14; 2009 (2) SACR 1 (SE); [2008] 3 All SA 270 (SE) (10 February 2008)
The court found that the police failed to discharge the onus of proving that the use of deadly force against the plaintiff was justified under section 49 of the Criminal Procedure Act. There was no reasonable basis for believing the plaintiff posed an imminent threat to the police or others, nor was there evidence that the offence for which arrest was sought was in progress or involved life-threatening violence. The police suspicion was based on weak circumstantial factors, and the allegation that shots were fired from the plaintiff's vehicle was not proven. The plaintiff was an innocent citi…
Source excerpt
S v Barnard (209/1984) [1986] ZASCA 23 (24 March 1986)
Appeal against a culpable homicide conviction failed. The court held that section 49(2) justification was not proved on the facts.
Explore more
