Gupta and Others v Malema and Others (9797/16) [2016] ZAGPPHC 65 (9 February 2016)
The court found that the applicants had established a clear right to protection from threats, intimidation, and incitement of violence. The respondents' conduct, including public statements and actions, created a reasonable apprehension of harm to the applicants and their employees, particularly journalists. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] ZAGPPHC 65
- Parties
- Applicant: Ajay Kumar Gupta; Applicant: Atul Kumar Gupta; Applicant: Rajesh Kumar Gupta; Applicant: Confident Concepts (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Oakbay Investments (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Sahara Computers (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: TNA Media (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Infinity Media (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: VR Laser Services (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Shiva Uranium (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Westdawn Investments (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Tegeta Exploration and Resources (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Julius Sello Malema; Respondent: Economic Freedom Fighters; Respondent: Ntobeng Ntobeng; Respondent: Lieutenant General Khomotso Phahlane NO Acting Police Commissioner
- Court
- North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 9 February 2016
- Case Number
- 9797/16
- Procedural Posture
- Urgent Application / Interdict Application Before Court; Final Order Issued
- Outcome
- Application granted; interdict issued against first to third respondents; protection ordered for applicants; costs awarded to applicants.
- Judges
- Louw JW
- Legal Topics
- Interdict, Freedom of Expression, Threats of Violence, Media Rights, Urgent Relief
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Ajay Kumar Gupta
Applicant
Atul Kumar Gupta
Applicant
Rajesh Kumar Gupta
Applicant
Confident Concepts (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
Oakbay Investments (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
Sahara Computers (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
TNA Media (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
Infinity Media (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
VR Laser Services (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
Shiva Uranium (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
Westdawn Investments (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
Tegeta Exploration and Resources (Pty) Ltd
Applicant
Julius Sello Malema
Respondent
Economic Freedom Fighters
Respondent
Ntobeng Ntobeng
Respondent
Lieutenant General Khomotso Phahlane NO Acting Police Commissioner
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interdict Application Before Court; Final Order Issued
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondents' conduct constituted threats of violence against the applicants or their employees.
- 2 Whether the respondents incited imminent violence or interfered with the applicants' media and journalistic activities.
- 3 Whether the applicants were entitled to urgent interdictory relief to protect their rights to safety, property, and freedom of expression.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicants had established a clear right to protection from threats, intimidation, and incitement of violence. The respondents' conduct, including public statements and actions, created a reasonable apprehension of harm to the applicants and their employees, particularly journalists. The relief sought was justified to prevent further unlawful conduct and to protect constitutional rights to safety, property, and freedom of expression. The court held that the respondents' political speech did not justify threats or incitement of violence, and urgent interdictory relief was warranted.
Court Disposition
Application granted; interdict issued against first to third respondents; protection ordered for applicants; costs awarded to applicants.
Orders
- The first to third respondents are interdicted from repeating threats of violence against the applicants or their employees and from inciting imminent violence.
- The first to third respondents are interdicted from interfering with the activities of journalists employed by the seventh and eighth applicants, including preventing attendance at public events.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
61 paragraphs
CASE NO: 9797/2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA
PRETORIA 09 February 2016
BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE LOUW JW
In the matter between:
AJAY KUMAR GUPTA
1ST APPLICANT
ATUL KUMAR GUPTA
2ND APPLICANT
RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA
3RD APPLICANT
CONFIDENT CONCEPTS (PTY) LTD
4TH APPLICANT
OAKBAY INVESTMENTS (PTY) LTD
5TH APPLICANT
SAHARA COMPUTERS (PTY) LTD
6TH APPLICANT
TNA MEDIA (PTY) LTD
7TH APPLICANT
INFINITY MEDIA (PTY) LTD
8TH APPLICANT
VR LASER SERVICES (PTY) LTD
9TH APPLICANT
SHIVA URANIUM (PTY) LTD
10TH APPLICANT
WESTDAWN INVESTMENTS (PTY) LTD
11TH APPLICANT
TEGETA EXPLORATION AND RESOURCES (PTY) LTD
12TH APPLICANT
AND
JULIUS SELLO MALEMA
1ST RESPONDENT
ECONOMIC FREEDOM FIGHTERS
2ND RESPONDENT
NTOBENG NTOBENG
3RD RESPONDENT
LIEUTENANT GENERAL KHOMOTSO
4TH RESPONDENT
JOHANNES PHAHLANE NO ACTING POLICE
COMMISSIONER
HAVING read the documents filed of record, heard counsel and considered the matter:
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The first to third respondents, jointly and severally, be interdicted from:
1.1 Repeating previous or further threats of violence against the person or property of the applicants or any of its employees and in particular from making public announcements inciting imminent violence against the applicants or any of its employees.
1.2 Interfering with activities of any journalist employed or deployed by the Seventh and Eight applicants and in particular be interdicted from any conduct or making or promoting any remarks preventing any journalist or investigator employed or deployed by the Seventh and Eight applicants from attending any events of relevance to the public in general including but not limited to any marches, gatherings or public meetings of a political nature by any political party including those of the second respondent.
1.3 Inciting imminent violence against the applicants or any of its employees in any way whatsoever by public announcements, media releases or public speech.
1.4 Causing damage, directly or indirectly or promoting damage to be caused to any of the applicants in person, its property or any of its employees.
1.5 Entering or threatening to incite its followers to enter any of the premises of the applicants for any other reason than as a bona fide and/or for normal commercial purpose and in particular the addresses of the applicants as they appear in Annexure “A” hereto being schedule of business addresses of the applicants.
1.6 Promoting or maintaining any conduct which could reasonably intimidate any of the applicants including any conduct or propaganda causing the employees of the applicants to fear for their lives, safety or unreasonably limiting their freedom of movement and trade.
1.7 Promoting infringement of the seventh and eight applicants’ right to freedom of expression and in particular the right to freedom of press and media in order for the seventh and eight applicants to maintain their business of reporting to the general public with fair comment and accurate balanced journalism.
1.8 Participating in any conduct to promote the removal of any of the applicants from Gauteng or the Republic of South Africa, serve in accordance with lawful process.
2. An order be granted requesting the fourth respondent to take the necessary steps in order to protect the interest of the applicants in as far as they might unlawfully be infringed upon by criminal activity resulting from the conduct of the first to third respondents
and in particular any non-compliance of the provisions of the interdict referred to in prayer 2 above.
3. An order be granted that the applicants may approach this Court on an urgent basis with supplemented papers under the aforesaid case number for ancillary or further relief should the respondents fail and/or refuse to comply with any of the terms of the relief granted under this application.
4. Costs of this application , including the costs of two counsel.
BY THE COURT
REGISTRAR
CB
Attorney: VAN DER MERWE
302