read by Kumleben JA
v Commissioner of Police and Another
sued Respondents for damages arising out of the shooting and killing
son by a
member of the Police. She alleged that the deceased had been
her claim for damages was based on the fact that she had lost that
pleaded that the killing was justified.
trial before Peete J it was agreed that the question of liability
would be dealt with first.
evidence had been led on that issue, Peete J proceeded to find that
both deceased and the policeman had been negligent and
to apportion blame between them. Having done so he awarded appellant
a portion of the damages she had claimed.
appealed against this judgment on the ground that Peete J had no
right to deal with damages in the light of the agreement.
correct. Moreover, as apportionment was not pleaded, he had no right
J found that respondents were liable and as there was no cross-appeal
order, the appeal must succeed.
judgment prepared by my brother Friedman with which by brother
Gauntlett and Iconcur, the following is ordered:
"Respondents are liable for the full amount of whatever damages
plaintiff succeeds in establishing."
matter is remitted to the court a quo for the purpose of determining
African Law (AfricanLII)
Ghana Law (GhaLII)
Laws of South Africa (Legislation)
Lesotho Law (LesLII)
Liberian Law (LiberLII)
Malawian Law (MalawiLII)
Namibian Law (NamibLII)
Nigerian Law (NigeriaLII)
Sierra Leone Law (SierraLII)
South African Law (SAFLII)
Seychelles Law (SeyLII)
Swaziland Law (SwaziLII)
Tanzania Law (TanzLII)
Ugandan Law (ULII)
Zambian Law (ZamLII)
Zimbabwean Law (ZimLII)
Commonwealth Countries' Law
LII of India
United States Law