Klik hier om die volledige joernaal in PDF-formaat af te laai - LitNet

LitNet Akademies Jaargang 9(2), Augustus 2012
34 Scott 1983:200–1 verkies middellike aanspreeklikheid as grondslag (vgl. egter Wiechers
1985:315–26), welke standpunt doelmatigheidshalwe ook deur die appèlhof in Mhlongo v
Minister of Police 1978 2 SA 551 (A) 566-7gehandhaaf word: “It was argued by appellant’s
counsel that in this connection [art. 1 van Wet 20 van 1957] the analogy of master and
servant is a false one and that officers of the State should be seen as the organs by which the
State itself acts and exercises its powers. Accordingly, when a policeman is about his
business as a policeman, his acts (including delicts) are the acts or delicts of the State: they
are not acts performed by a servant on behalf of its master. Consequently no question of
vicarious liability arises. The State is liable for the acts of its officers or ‘servant’ because
they are the State’s own acts. While this is an interesting theory ..., I am of the opinion that
the view that all members of the police force are prima facie servants of the State, is too well
entrenched in decisions of this Court ... to be reconsidered at this stage.” Sien ook F v
Minister of Safety and Security 2012 1 SA 536 (KH) 564.
35 2011 3 SA 487 (HHA) 499; sien ook F v Minister of Safety and Security 2012 1 SA 536
(KH) 564 (minderheidsuitspraak); vgl. Minister of Law and Order v Ngobo 1992 4 SA 822
(A) 832.
36 Minister of Safety and Security v Van Duivenboden 2002 6 SA 431 (HHA); Van Eeden v
Minister of Safety and Security 2003 1 SA 389 (HHA); Minister of Safety and Security v
Hamilton 2004 2 SA 216 (HHA); Minister of Safety and Security v Carmichele 2004 3 305
(HHA).
37 Vgl. F v Minister of Safety and Security 2012 1 SA 536 (KH) 564 vn. 33
(minderheidsuitspraak). Die meerderheid van die hof het hulle nie oor direkte
aanspreeklikheid uitgelaat nie (557).
38 Sien n. 36.
39 Neethling 2011(a):428 e.v.; vgl. ook Scott (2011(a):779–80).
40 2011(a):779–80.
41 2012 1 SA 536 (KH) 557.
42 557 e.v., veral 564 e.v.
43 565–6.
44 In Media 24 Ltd v SA Taxi Securitisation (Pty) Ltd 2011 5 SA 329 (HHA) 341 stel die hof
dit duidelik dat “when this court has taken a policy decision, we cannot change it just because
we would have decided the matter differently. We must live with that policy decision, bearing
in mind that litigants and legal practitioners have arranged their affairs in accordance with
that decision. Unless we are therefore satisfied that there are good reasons for change, we
should confirm the status a quo.”
94