Baba and Others v Clicks Group Limited and Another (EC 12/2020) [2022] ZAEQC 5 (28 February 2022)
The court found that Clicks Group Limited was not the correct legal entity to be cited, as the advertisement was published by Clicks Retailers, its subsidiary. However, given the public apology and corrective steps taken by the holding company, the court proceeded to consider the merits. The applicants failed to establish that the original TRESemmé advertisement, as published on the Clicks Retailers website, constituted unfair discrimination under sections 7 and 12 of the Equality Act. The images that caused public outcry were cropped and circulated on social media by unknown persons, and the respondents were not responsible for those images. The applicants did not prove that the...
- Citation
- [2022] ZAEQC 5
- Parties
- Applicant: Ntombizodwa Cingiswa Baba; Applicant: Langathani Thembelihle Sibanda; Applicant: Lozitla Mahlangu; Applicant: Katlego Menoe; Applicant: Zoleka Radebe; Applicant: Winkey Maluwa; Applicant: Fezeka Mshona; Applicant: Tshepiso Mosidi; Applicant: Khanyisile Hlatshwayo; Applicant: Lesego Motowane; Applicant: Ofentse Mbhuti; Applicant: Bongiwe Badela; Applicant: Siphokazi Zamxaka; Applicant: Nwabisa Phila; Applicant: Zanele Zamxaka; Applicant: Mbali Macu; Applicant: Duduzile Faith Macu; Applicant: Nomonde Aphane; Respondent: Clicks Group Limited; Respondent: Unilever South Africa Proprietary Limited
- Court
- Equality Court
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 28 February 2022
- Case Number
- EC 12/2020
- Procedural Posture
- Urgent Application / Final Judgment on Merits
- Outcome
- Application dismissed.
- Judges
- M J Dolamo
- Legal Topics
- Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act, Unfair Discrimination, Subsidiarity Principle, Corporate Liability, Objective Test for Discrimination
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Ntombizodwa Cingiswa Baba
Applicant
Langathani Thembelihle Sibanda
Applicant
Lozitla Mahlangu
Applicant
Katlego Menoe
Applicant
Zoleka Radebe
Applicant
Winkey Maluwa
Applicant
Fezeka Mshona
Applicant
Tshepiso Mosidi
Applicant
Khanyisile Hlatshwayo
Applicant
Lesego Motowane
Applicant
Ofentse Mbhuti
Applicant
Bongiwe Badela
Applicant
Siphokazi Zamxaka
Applicant
Nwabisa Phila
Applicant
Zanele Zamxaka
Applicant
Mbali Macu
Applicant
Duduzile Faith Macu
Applicant
Nomonde Aphane
Applicant
Clicks Group Limited
Respondent
Unilever South Africa Proprietary Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Judgment on Merits
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Clicks Group Limited was the correct legal entity to be cited as respondent.
- 2 Whether the TRESemmé advertisement constituted unfair discrimination on the basis of race under the Equality Act.
- 3 Whether the advertisement disseminated information that could reasonably be construed as intending to unfairly discriminate against black women.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that Clicks Group Limited was not the correct legal entity to be cited, as the advertisement was published by Clicks Retailers, its subsidiary. However, given the public apology and corrective steps taken by the holding company, the court proceeded to consider the merits. The applicants failed to establish that the original TRESemmé advertisement, as published on the Clicks Retailers website, constituted unfair discrimination under sections 7 and 12 of the Equality Act. The images that caused public outcry were cropped and circulated on social media by unknown persons, and the respondents were not responsible for those images. The applicants did not prove that the...
Court Disposition
Application dismissed.
Orders
- The application is dismissed.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment