Phakula v Minister of Safety and Security

On 26 October 2010, Thabang Phakula was shot multiple times by members of a SAPS special task force in Die Heuwel, Witbank, during an alleged armed robbery operation. The police alleged that Phakula was part of an armed gang attempting to commit robbery with aggravating circumstances and that he fled the scene, necessitating the use of force under s 49(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977. Phakula denied involvement, claiming he was walking in the street after getting lost on his way to visit his girlfriend when he was shot from a balcony. After being shot, he was allegedly assaulted while lying on the ground, arrested without a warrant, and detained for approximately 11 months pending trial. He was ultimately acquitted of all criminal charges due to lack of evidence. As a result of the shooting, Phakula suffered severe injuries, disfigurement, loss of teeth, and was medically boarded from the SANDF. He instituted a delictual claim against the Minister of Safety and Security for damages arising from unlawful shooting, assault, arrest, and detention.

The appeal was upheld with costs. The order of the High Court was set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria, differently constituted, for a full retrial on all issues.

This case is significant for its strong reaffirmation of the principles governing separation of issues under Uniform Rule 33(4). The Supreme Court of Appeal cautioned against ill-defined or inappropriate separations, particularly where issues such as police use of force, arrest, assault, and detention are factually and legally intertwined. The judgment underscores the need for holistic adjudication in delictual claims against the police and highlights procedural fairness and judicial efficiency in South African civil litigation.