Union Government (Minister of Justice) v Thorne

JurisdictionSouth Africa
JudgeDe Villiers CJ, Wessels JA, Curlewis JA and Stratford JA
Judgment Date05 November 1929
Citation1930 AD 47
Hearing Date09 October 1929
CourtAppellate Division

De Villiers, C.J.:

The question in this appeal is whether the Government is liable in damages for an injury sustained by respondent in collision with a native constable under the following circumstances. Respondent was proceeding along the main road to Benoni from Brakpan at night on his motor cycle at from 15 to 18 miles per hour, and a trolley drawn by mules was proceeding in the opposite direction. At a point where there is a branch road leading to the van Ryn compound the respondent collided with, the trolley. The magistrate found the driver of the trolley

De Villiers, C.J.

was to blame because he turned suddenly off to his right to take the van Ryn road without giving due warning or taking proper precautions. The driver was a native constable, Paul, a member of the police force, engaged at the time on official duty. In view of the defence it is important to state exactly the nature of the duty the constable was performing at the time. It appears that the sergeant on duty at the Charge Office, Benoni, who had received a report that a native had been knocked down by a cyclist and had received a serious would on the head, instructed Paul to proceed to the spot with the trolley and mules and bring the injured person to the Charge Office. Paul, accompanied by another native constable, Joseph, set out on the trolley and on the way collided with respondent. The defence material to the present appeal was that the Government was not liable for the wrongful acts of the driver, a native constable in the South African Police, who was then engaged as such constable in carrying out his statutory duties as such member. The Court found against this contention, and gave judgment for an amount of £161 8s. 0d damages. An appeal to the Transvaal Provincial Division having proved unsuccessful, special leave to appeal was obtained from this Court. It was argued that not every person who is appointed, employed and paid by Government is necessarily a servant of the Crown. All duties a policeman performs qua policeman are statutory duties. Where a statute imposes a duty upon a person, the Crown cannot be said to be the master of such person. In the performance of such duty the person is the servant of Parliament, not of the Crown. He cannot be said to be under the control of the Minister. To prove that the constable was carrying out a statutory duty at the time reliance was placed upon sec. 7 (1) of Act 14, 1912, upon the South African...

To continue reading

Request your trial
42 practice notes
  • F v Minister of Safety and Security and Others
    • South Africa
    • Invalid date
    ...All SA 240): referred to Tshabalala v Lekoa City Council 1992 (3) SA 21 (A): referred to H Union Government (Minister of Justice) v Thorne 1930 AD 47: referred to Van Eeden v Minister of Safety and Security (Women's Legal Centre Trust, as Amicus Curiae) 2003 (1) SA 389 (SCA) ([2002] 4 All S......
  • F v Minister of Safety and Security and Others
    • South Africa
    • Invalid date
    ...1 All SA 240): referred to Tshabalala v Lekoa City Council 1992 (3) SA 21 (A): referred to Union Government (Minister of Justice) v Thorne 1930 AD 47: referred to Van Eeden v Minister of Safety and Security (Women's Legal Centre Trust, as Amicus Curiae) 2003 (1) SA 389 (SCA) ([2002] 4 All S......
  • Van der Berg v Coopers & Lybrand Trust (Pty) Ltd and Others
    • South Africa
    • Invalid date
    ...duty was such that it took Lane out of the category of employee for the time being (see Union Government 8 (Minister of Justice) v Thorne 1930 AD 47 at 51 and Mhlongo v Minister of Police (supra at 567E-G)). Not only did Republic Trustees fail to do so, it is legitimate to infer, in my view......
  • Vicarious liability: not simply a matter of legal policy
    • South Africa
    • Juta Stellenbosch Law Review No. , May 2019
    • 27 May 2019
    ...Company v Crickmore 1921 AD 107; Lawford v Minister of Justice & Schmidt 1914 NLR 284; Union Government (Minister of Justice) v Thorne 1930 AD 47. For a historical analysis of state liability for the delicts of the police, see Dendy "When the Force Frolics: A South African History of State ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
40 cases
  • F v Minister of Safety and Security and Others
    • South Africa
    • Invalid date
    ...All SA 240): referred to Tshabalala v Lekoa City Council 1992 (3) SA 21 (A): referred to H Union Government (Minister of Justice) v Thorne 1930 AD 47: referred to Van Eeden v Minister of Safety and Security (Women's Legal Centre Trust, as Amicus Curiae) 2003 (1) SA 389 (SCA) ([2002] 4 All S......
  • F v Minister of Safety and Security and Others
    • South Africa
    • Invalid date
    ...1 All SA 240): referred to Tshabalala v Lekoa City Council 1992 (3) SA 21 (A): referred to Union Government (Minister of Justice) v Thorne 1930 AD 47: referred to Van Eeden v Minister of Safety and Security (Women's Legal Centre Trust, as Amicus Curiae) 2003 (1) SA 389 (SCA) ([2002] 4 All S......
  • Van der Berg v Coopers & Lybrand Trust (Pty) Ltd and Others
    • South Africa
    • Invalid date
    ...duty was such that it took Lane out of the category of employee for the time being (see Union Government 8 (Minister of Justice) v Thorne 1930 AD 47 at 51 and Mhlongo v Minister of Police (supra at 567E-G)). Not only did Republic Trustees fail to do so, it is legitimate to infer, in my view......
  • Minister of Law and Order v Ngobo
    • South Africa
    • Invalid date
    ...of the Police' (1989) Acta Juridica at 24-43; American Jurisprudence 2nd ed vol 58 at 456; Union Government (Minister of Justice) v Thorne 1930 AD 47; Minister van Polisie v Gamble en 'n Ander 1979 (4) SA 759 (A); Minister of Police v B Rabie 1986 (1) SA 117 (A); Martin (1989) 52 THRHR 273;......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Vicarious liability: not simply a matter of legal policy
    • South Africa
    • Juta Stellenbosch Law Review No. , May 2019
    • 27 May 2019
    ...Company v Crickmore 1921 AD 107; Lawford v Minister of Justice & Schmidt 1914 NLR 284; Union Government (Minister of Justice) v Thorne 1930 AD 47. For a historical analysis of state liability for the delicts of the police, see Dendy "When the Force Frolics: A South African History of State ......
  • Vicarious liability of the state for the abuse and misuse of firearms by police officers
    • South Africa
    • Sabinet Lesotho Law Journal No. 25-2, May 2017
    • 31 May 2017
    ...Dames v De Kock 1958 (1) SA 773 (E); Marinus Wiechers, Administrative law (1985) 335. 2 Union Government (Minister of J ustice) v Thorne [1930] AD 47 51. In Cox v Minister of Justice [2016] UKSC 10 para [21] Lord Reed approved of Lord Phillips observation in Various Claimants v Catholic Chi......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT