Inzinga Ranch CC v Mashiyi (A265/17) [2018] ZAWCHC 108 (23 August 2018)

Inzinga Ranch CC v Mashiyi (A265/17) [2018] ZAWCHC 108 (23 August 2018)

The court found that the appellant's conduct towards the respondent was motivated by racial prejudice and constituted unfair discrimination and harassment under the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act. The appellant's adverse attitude, invasive inspections, and manipulative demands were not justified by the facts or the lease agreement. The respondent's identity as an African woman triggered the appellant's trepidation and led to the imposition of onerous terms and persistent interference. The court held that a reasonable, objective and informed person would perceive the appellant's conduct as unfair discrimination based on race. The appeal was dismissed, and...

Citation
[2018] ZAWCHC 108
Parties
Appellant: Inzinga Ranch CC; Respondent: Busisiwe Mashiyi
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 August 2018
Case Number
A265/17
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Equality Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Equality Court orders confirmed.
Judges
Samela, Thulare
Legal Topics
Unfair Discrimination, Harassment, Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act, Racial Discrimination, Lease Agreement, Right to Dignity
Constitutional Law Land and Property Unfair Discrimination Harassment Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act Racial Discrimination Lease Agreement Right to Dignity

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Inzinga Ranch CC

Appellant

Busisiwe Mashiyi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Equality Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant unfairly discriminated against the respondent on the basis of race.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant harassed the respondent in breach of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act.
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of the appellant justified the damages and apology ordered by the Equality Court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant's conduct towards the respondent was motivated by racial prejudice and constituted unfair discrimination and harassment under the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act. The appellant's adverse attitude, invasive inspections, and manipulative demands were not justified by the facts or the lease agreement. The respondent's identity as an African woman triggered the appellant's trepidation and led to the imposition of onerous terms and persistent interference. The court held that a reasonable, objective and informed person would perceive the appellant's conduct as unfair discrimination based on race. The appeal was dismissed, and...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Equality Court orders confirmed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The appellant is to pay the costs.