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
Dlamini v Ntuli and Others (Leave to Appeal) (D4845/2015) [2024] ZAKZDHC 66 (2 October 2024)
The High Court refused the fourth defendant’s application for leave to appeal, holding that the transcript was admitted by consent and the appeal had no merit.
Baloyi and Another v Minister of Police and Another (14884/2015) [2022] ZAGPJHC 760 (23 September 2022)
The High Court held that the arrest, detention and search were lawful on the facts, dismissed most claims, and found the State liable only for second plaintiff’s arrest assault claim.
Minister of Police v Zamani (CA 10/2021) [2021] ZAECBHC 41; 2023 (5) SA 263 (ECB) (12 October 2021)
The court held that prescription in a delictual claim for wrongful arrest and detention commences when the plaintiff is released from detention, as at that point the plaintiff has knowledge of the material facts and the identity of the debtor. The plaintiff's ignorance of his legal rights or remedies does not delay the running of prescription. The facts required for prescription to begin are those necessary to support the claim, not legal conclusions or knowledge of the lawfulness of the conduct. The respondent knew the identity of the police officer and the circumstances of his arrest and de…
Source excerpt
Minister of Police v PJ ; PJ v Minister of Police (CA308/2019) [2021] ZAECGHC 27 (16 March 2021)
The High Court granted condonation for the Minister’s late appeal and the respondent’s late replying affidavit, finding acceptable explanation and reasonable prospects.
Schoombee and Others v Minister of Police and Another (2680/204; 992/2015; 994/2015; 995/2015; 996/2015) [2019] ZAECGHC 94 (1 October 2019)
The High Court awarded damages for wrongful arrest, detention, malicious prosecution, assault, and abduction arising from police conduct in Lady Grey and Senqu Municipality.
Magoabi v Minister of Police (CA303/2017) [2019] ZAECGHC 74 (8 August 2019)
Appeal upheld in a wrongful arrest claim. The High Court held the plaintiff was not told of the bench warrant and awarded R60,000 plus interest from judgment.
Wanda v Minister of Safety & Security (8810/2008) [2017] ZAKZDHC 7 (3 March 2017)
The court set aside amendments adding malicious prosecution and increased loss of earnings after liability had been finalized, but allowed a misnomer correction and a higher general damages claim.
Makhwelo v Minister of Safety And Security (2013/26724) [2015] ZAGPJHC 10; 2017 (1) SA 274 (GJ) (3 February 2015)
High Court urgent application on late statutory notice under the state liability act, arising from a wrongful arrest and detention claim.
A.M v Minister of Safety and Security (963/2012) [2014] ZAECGHC 68; 2015 (2) SACR 28 (ECG) (18 August 2014)
The court found the plaintiff to be a credible witness and rejected the defendant's evidence as improbable, inconsistent, and exaggerated. The arresting officer failed to establish that the plaintiff was drunk and disorderly in the legal sense, and the arrest and detention were therefore unlawful. The court accepted the plaintiff's account of sexual assault, supported by medical evidence of recent anal injuries and psychological evidence of PTSD. The only police officer fitting the description and with access to the cell was Sergeant Franks. The defendant's version was found to be false and m…
Source excerpt
Peet v Ross (04/30267) [2005] ZAGPHC 381 (3 November 2005)
The court held that motion proceedings are not permissible for claims of unliquidated damages, as established in Williams v Tunstall and Room Hire Co. v Jeppe Street Mansions. The applicant failed to provide sufficient facts to establish a proper judicial assessment of damages or to support personal liability against the respondent. The respondent, as CEO of Edcon, was not shown to have performed, authorised, directed, or procured any wrongful act. The claim was found to be vexatious, and the application was dismissed with costs on an attorney and own client scale.
Source excerpt
Explore more
