CoA says P20k is enough for unlawful arrest, detention
Goitsemodimo Kaelo | Wednesday April 1, 2026 06:00
CoA justices, Leatile Dambe, Tebogo Maruping, and Modiri Letsididi were in agreement, confirming the decision of High Court judge, Godfrey Radijeng, in awarding him P20,000 as general damages.
Tshimologo had sought a total of P900,000 as a combined sum for pain and suffering and permanent loss of teeth P500,000, payment of P200,000 for unlawful arrest and detention, P100,000 for anguish and humiliation, P35,000 as damages for being remanded for 14 days for an offence he did not commit, and P75,000 as compensation for loss of earnings having been fired from work after being accused, arrested and charged.
The High Court had awarded him P20,000 and dismissed the rest of the claims, saying he had not provided enough evidence to support his claim. However, dissatisfied with Justice Radijeng's judgment, Tshimologo had approached the appellate court. His grounds of appeal were that the trial court erred in refusing to grant damages sought on the basis that he did not lead evidence in proof of damages, despite evidence on record showing injuries suffered by the appellant.
He also argued that it was a misdirection by the court below to rely on his failure to provide expert evidence on the extent of injuries and pain suffered, and thereby declined to award damages in relation to his claim for pain and suffering and permanent loss of teeth.
Additionally, Tshimologo was of the view that as a self-actor, the court below should have assessed the quantum, though no details of the same had been given. The respondents, who are the Attorney General, Commissioner of Police and Director of Public Prosecutions, did not file any opposition to the appeal and instead filed a notice to abide by the decision of the court.
When delivering the decision, Justice Dambe said that when the judge dismissed the claims for damages under various heads because no evidence had been led on which he could find for the Appellant, he was correct in his assessment of the matter.
Dambe explained that the Appellant's default judgment was granted in terms of Order 25 Rule 11 after the Respondent failed to comply with Order 25 Rule 3 (1) by their failure to deliver a plea in time.
'It is a requirement in terms of the law that before granting judgment in default in the course of judicial case management, the judge must be satisfied that on the evidence before him such judgment is fully justified,' noted Dambe in her judgment.
'The judge had rightly invited the plaintiff to call evidence to prove his case. That was a necessary admonition by the judge because the mere fact that the proceedings were unopposed did not entitle a litigant to a remedy he was seeking without further ado. There was a duty upon the court to consider the claim and satisfy itself on whether the litigant had made out a case for the relief sought on his papers alone,' Dambe continued.
Furthermore, Justice Dabe found that the ruling by the Judge that the declaration only laid a claim of P500,000 for pain and suffering without any causal connection to any action on the part of the respondent which brought about the injury, was a proper conclusion to reach.
'All other claims were rightly dismissed for the same reasons,' she said.
Whilst on the quantum of damages, Tshimologo felt that he was entitled to a better award than P20,000 as compensation for unlawful arrest and detention, Dambe found that the contention had no merit.
She noted that the judge below considered the jurisprudence on prior awards that were made by the courts and came to the conclusion that what he considered fair, reasonable and just in the circumstances of this case was an award of P20,000.