Go Touch Down Resort-Season CC and Another v Farm Rural Informal Dwellers Association and Another (60735/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 50 (20 January 2022)
The court found that the Applicants established a prima facie right to protection against unlawful gatherings and protests on their premises, as the Respondents failed to demonstrate compliance with the Regulation of Gatherings Act and did not refute allegations of interference with business operations. The urgency was justified by ongoing threats of further gatherings and the risk of irreparable harm to the Applicants' business and reputation. The Respondents are not employees nor a registered trade union, and thus have no standing to interfere with the Applicants' operations. The requirements for an interim interdict were satisfied, and the court granted a rule nisi as an interim order,...
- Citation
- [2022] ZAGPPHC 50
- Parties
- Applicant: Go Touch Down Resort-Season CC; Applicant: Belrex 478 CC; Respondent: Farm Rural Informal Dwellers Association; Respondent: Kgomotso Modiselle
- Court
- North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 20 January 2022
- Case Number
- 60735/2021
- Procedural Posture
- Urgent Application / Interim Interdict on Urgent Roll
- Outcome
- Interim interdict granted; rule nisi issued restraining Respondents from unlawful conduct pending return date; each party to pay own costs.
- Judges
- Maumela
- Legal Topics
- Interim Interdict, Regulation of Gatherings Act, Constitutional Rights, Jurisdiction, Balance of Convenience
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Go Touch Down Resort-Season CC
Applicant
Belrex 478 CC
Applicant
Farm Rural Informal Dwellers Association
Respondent
Kgomotso Modiselle
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interim Interdict on Urgent Roll
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Respondents contravened the Regulation of Gatherings Act during protest actions.
- 2 Whether the Applicants are entitled to an interim interdict restraining unlawful conduct on their premises.
- 3 Whether the matter falls within the jurisdiction of the High Court or the Labour Court.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the Applicants established a prima facie right to protection against unlawful gatherings and protests on their premises, as the Respondents failed to demonstrate compliance with the Regulation of Gatherings Act and did not refute allegations of interference with business operations. The urgency was justified by ongoing threats of further gatherings and the risk of irreparable harm to the Applicants' business and reputation. The Respondents are not employees nor a registered trade union, and thus have no standing to interfere with the Applicants' operations. The requirements for an interim interdict were satisfied, and the court granted a rule nisi as an interim order,...
Court Disposition
Interim interdict granted; rule nisi issued restraining Respondents from unlawful conduct pending return date; each party to pay own costs.
Orders
- A rule nisi is issued, calling upon the Respondents and all other interested parties to show cause on 16 March 2022 why the order should not be confirmed.
- The Respondents are interdicted and restrained from participating in, or inciting others to participate in, any unlawful conduct, gatherings, or protests on the Applicants' premises or access roads.
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