To be read by Kumleben JA
Shabangu v Commissioner of Police and Another
Appellant sued Respondents for damages arising out of the shooting and killing of her
son by a member of the Police. She alleged that the deceased had been supporting her
and that her claim for damages was based on the fact that she had lost that support.
Respondent pleaded that the killing was justified.
At the trial before Peete J it was agreed that the question of liability would be dealt with first.
After evidence had been led on that issue, Peete J proceeded to find that both deceased and the policeman had been negligent and he proceeded to apportion blame between them. Having done so he awarded appellant a portion of the damages she had claimed.
She appealed against this judgment on the ground that Peete J had no right to deal with damages in the light of the agreement.
That is correct. Moreover, as apportionment was not pleaded, he had no right to
As Peete J found that respondents were liable and as there was no cross-appeal against
that order, the appeal must succeed.
In a 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."
The matter is remitted to the court a quo for the purpose of determining plaintiffs