critically reflect on the interplay between constitutional and common law remedies in the judgment of Ramdin v Minister of Police (07223/14) [2018] ZAGPJHC 661 (13 December 2018).
In the case of Ramdin v Minister of Police, the interplay between constitutional and common law remedies played a significant role in the judgment. The case involved a claim for damages arising from an unlawful arrest and detention by the South African Police Service.
The court's decision in this case demonstrated the importance of balancing constitutional rights with common law principles in the administration of justice. The court reaffirmed the importance of respecting individuals' rights under the South African Constitution, particularly the right to freedom and security of the person. This constitutional principle informed the court's reasoning and decision-making process throughout the case.
At the same time, the court also relied on common law principles to assess the harm caused to the plaintiff as a result of the unlawful arrest and detention. The court assessed the amount of damages to be awarded based on common law principles of compensation for harm suffered, taking into account factors such as loss of income, emotional distress, and violation of the plaintiff's dignity and privacy.
The interplay between constitutional and common law remedies in this case highlights the need for courts to consider both legal frameworks when addressing violations of individuals' rights. By incorporating constitutional principles into common law remedies, the court was able to ensure that the plaintiff's rights were protected and that justice was served.
Overall, the judgment in Ramdin v Minister of Police demonstrates the importance of considering both constitutional and common law remedies in cases involving violations of individuals' rights. By balancing these two legal frameworks, the court was able to provide a comprehensive and just resolution to the case at hand.