Dendy v University of the Witwatersrand (597/05) [2007] ZASCA 30; [2007] 3 All SA 1 (SCA); 2007 (8) BCLR 910 (SCA); 2007 (5) SA 382 (SCA); (2007) 28 ILJ 2215 (SCA) (28 March 2007)

Dendy v University of the Witwatersrand (597/05) [2007] ZASCA 30; [2007] 3 All SA 1 (SCA); 2007 (8) BCLR 910 (SCA); 2007 (5) SA 382 (SCA); (2007) 28 ILJ 2215 (SCA) (28 March 2007)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant's claims for damages based on alleged violations of his constitutional right to dignity and common law injuria could not succeed. The conduct complained of—the procedural irregularities in the appointment process and the refusal to provide reasons and minutes—was not objectively insulting or offensive when tested against the standard of a reasonable person. The common law, as laid down in Delange v Costa, requires both subjective and objective insult for injuria, and the facts did not meet this threshold. Furthermore, the court found that the common law was consistent with the Constitution and did not require development under section...

Citation
[2007] ZASCA 30
Parties
Appellant: Mervyn Dendy; Respondent: University of the Witwatersrand; Respondent: Neil Garrod; Respondent: Andrew St Quintin Skeen
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 March 2007
Case Number
597/05
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Exception Upheld in High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Farlam, Scott, Van Heerden, Jafta, Ponnan
Legal Topics
Right to Dignity, Actio Injuriarum, Development of Common Law, Procedural Irregularity, Alternative Remedies
Constitutional Law Delict Right to Dignity Actio Injuriarum Development of Common Law Procedural Irregularity Alternative Remedies

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mervyn Dendy

Appellant

University of the Witwatersrand

Respondent

Neil Garrod

Respondent

Andrew St Quintin Skeen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Exception Upheld in High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the alleged procedural irregularities and refusal to provide reasons/minutes constituted a violation of the appellant's constitutional right to dignity and/or a common law injuria.
  2. 2 Whether the common law requires development under section 39(2) of the Constitution to provide a damages remedy for such violations.
  3. 3 Whether alternative remedies such as review or application for reasons preclude a damages claim.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant's claims for damages based on alleged violations of his constitutional right to dignity and common law injuria could not succeed. The conduct complained of—the procedural irregularities in the appointment process and the refusal to provide reasons and minutes—was not objectively insulting or offensive when tested against the standard of a reasonable person. The common law, as laid down in Delange v Costa, requires both subjective and objective insult for injuria, and the facts did not meet this threshold. Furthermore, the court found that the common law was consistent with the Constitution and did not require development under section...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including those occasioned by the employment of two counsel.