Khedama v Minister of Police (667/2024) [2025] ZASCA 79 (5 June 2025)
REPORTABILITY SCORE: 82/100 Delict — Unlawful arrest and detention — Quantum of damages — Appellant claimed damages for unlawful arrest and detention for 10 days, initially awarded R1,000,000 by trial court, reduced to R350,000 by full court — Appeal upheld, and damages increased to R580,000 — Court emphasized the need for fair compensation reflecting the severity of the appellant's treatment and infringement of constitutional rights.
![Khedama v Minister of Police (667/2024) [2025] ZASCA 79 (5 June 2025)](https://junior-counsel-s3.s3.amazonaws.com/media/images/blog_header_51750.2e16d0ba.fill-800x300.png)
Case Note
Khedama v The Minister of Police — [2025] ZASCA 79 — 2025-06-05
Dates, Case No & Neutral Citation
2025-06-05; Case No 667/2024; Khedama v The Minister of Police (667/2024) [2025] ZASCA 79
Court and Coram
Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa; HUGHES JA, DLODLO AJJA, STEYN AJJA
Reportability
Not reportable
HEADNOTE
Summary
Delict – unlawful arrest and detention – fair and reasonable damages – quantum – fair and reasonable compensation for appellant’s unlawful arrest and detention for a period of 10 days – factors considered for such determination – appeal upheld.
Held
The appeal is upheld with costs, and the damages awarded by the full court are set aside and replaced with an award of R580,000.
Cases, Statutes and Texts Cited
Cases: Minister of Safety and Security and Others v Van der Walt and Another; De Klerk v Minister of Police; Mahlangu and Another v Minister of Police; Minister of Police v Nontsele; Rahim v Minister of Home Affairs; Woji v Minister of Home Affairs; Lumba (WL) vs Secretary of State for the Home Department
Legislation: Prescribed Rate of Interest Act 55 of 1975; Section 12 of the Constitution; Section 35 of the Constitution
THE FACTS
The appellant, Cynthia Nobuhle Khedama, was unlawfully arrested and detained for 10 days after being questioned at King Shaka International Airport. During her detention, she experienced significant humiliation, psychological trauma, and was subjected to poor conditions. These factors contributed to the severity of her claim for damages.
THE ISSUES
The primary issue before the court was whether the damages awarded for the unlawful arrest and detention of the appellant were fair and reasonable in light of the circumstances surrounding her case.
ANALYSIS
In its analysis, the court took into account the treatment of the appellant during her detention, emphasizing the psychological impact of her arrest. The court recognized the need for compensation that adequately reflects the seriousness of the infringement of her rights, particularly in relation to personal liberty and the arbitrary nature of her detention.
REMEDY
The court ultimately awarded R580,000 in damages for the unlawful arrest and detention, along with interest from the date of service of the summons, thereby setting a precedent for future cases involving similar violations of rights.
LEGAL PRINCIPLES
The assessment of damages for unlawful arrest and detention should reflect the importance of personal liberty and the seriousness of arbitrary deprivation of liberty, ensuring that victims receive fair compensation for their suffering.