Afrisix (Pty) Ltd v Economic Freedom Fighters (21/23502) [2021] ZAGPJHC 845 (25 June 2021)

Afrisix (Pty) Ltd v Economic Freedom Fighters (21/23502) [2021] ZAGPJHC 845 (25 June 2021)

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case for the granting of interim relief. The facts supported the conclusion that Mr Hlopu was a member of the EFF, as evidenced by his conduct, statements, and attire. The EFF's mere denial of membership was unconvincing, given its exclusive knowledge of its own membership records. Applying the principles of vicarious liability, the court held that a political party, like an employer, may be held liable for the wrongful acts of its members when those acts are sufficiently connected to the party's affairs and when fairness so requires. The recruitment and deployment of members by the party creates a risk of harm to third...

Citation
[2021] ZAGPJHC 845
Parties
Applicant: Afrisix (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Economic Freedom Fighters
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 June 2021
Case Number
21/23502
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interim Interdict Pending Finalisation of Main Application
Outcome
Interim interdict granted against the respondent; costs awarded to the applicant.
Judges
Molahlehi
Legal Topics
Interim Interdict, Vicarious Liability, Urgent Relief, Defamation, Contractual Interference, Harassment
Civil Procedure Delict Commercial and Corporate Interim Interdict Vicarious Liability Urgent Relief Defamation Contractual Interference +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Afrisix (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Economic Freedom Fighters

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Interim Interdict Pending Finalisation of Main Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent, a political party, can be held vicariously liable for the wrongful conduct of its member.
  2. 2 Whether the requirements for an urgent interim interdict have been satisfied.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has established a prima facie right to relief against intimidation, harassment, and interference with contractual relationships.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case for the granting of interim relief. The facts supported the conclusion that Mr Hlopu was a member of the EFF, as evidenced by his conduct, statements, and attire. The EFF's mere denial of membership was unconvincing, given its exclusive knowledge of its own membership records. Applying the principles of vicarious liability, the court held that a political party, like an employer, may be held liable for the wrongful acts of its members when those acts are sufficiently connected to the party's affairs and when fairness so requires. The recruitment and deployment of members by the party creates a risk of harm to third...

Court Disposition

Interim interdict granted against the respondent; costs awarded to the applicant.

Orders

  • The matter is treated as urgent and non-compliance with the Uniform Rules is condoned.
  • Pending finalisation of the main application, the respondent is interdicted from intimidating or threatening the applicant's employees.