Minister of Safety and Security v Slabbert

The respondent (plaintiff) was arrested without a warrant by SAPS officers in Klipplaat on the night of 5 February 2005 for being drunk and disorderly in a public street and obstructing traffic. He resisted arrest and was subdued with pepper spray and force. He was detained overnight at the police station. While he was being processed, his wife requested that he be released into her care, but the arresting officer refused because the plaintiff was still intoxicated and in line with a local police practice of detaining drunk and disorderly suspects for at least four hours to allow them to sober up. The plaintiff was released the following morning and issued with a notice to appear in court; the charge was later withdrawn. He sued the Minister for damages for wrongful arrest, detention, assault and malicious prosecution. The High Court dismissed all claims except for part of the detention, holding that continued detention after the wife’s request was unlawful, and awarded damages. The Minister appealed.

The appeal was upheld with costs, including the costs of two counsel. The High Court’s order was set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the plaintiff’s claims with costs.

The case affirms fundamental principles of South African civil procedure that parties are bound by their pleadings and that courts may not decide cases on unpleaded issues unless fully canvassed at trial. It also clarifies the law on justification for continued detention of persons arrested for being drunk and disorderly, confirming that police are not obliged to release an intoxicated detainee merely because a third party offers to take custody, absent evidence that the detainee is sober and no longer a danger. The judgment reinforces limits on wrongful detention claims and guards against ‘trial by ambush’.