Johnstone v SLS (A3167/18; 1731/2017) [2020] ZAGPJHC 447; 2022 (1) SACR 250 (GJ) (13 May 2020)

Johnstone v SLS (A3167/18; 1731/2017) [2020] ZAGPJHC 447; 2022 (1) SACR 250 (GJ) (13 May 2020)

The court found that the appellant's conduct, including obsessive messaging, phone tracking, threats, and subsequent acts such as fake social media accounts and malicious reports, constituted harassment and emotional abuse under the Domestic Violence Act. The evidence, particularly the WhatsApp messages and the respondent's affidavits, demonstrated a sustained pattern of controlling and abusive behaviour that caused psychological harm. The appellant's denials regarding responsibility for the post-breakup incidents were implausible and unsupported. The respondent's delay in seeking protection was explained by the complexities of domestic violence, including emotional manipulation and fear....

Citation
[2020] ZAGPJHC 447
Parties
Appellant: Glen Johnstone; Respondent: S [....] 1 L [....] S [....] 2
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 May 2020
Case Number
A3167/18; 1731/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Final Protection Order Under Domestic Violence Act
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs. Final protection order confirmed.
Judges
Windell, Twala
Legal Topics
Domestic Violence Act, Protection Order, Harassment, Emotional Abuse, Procedural Fairness
Family and Children Civil Procedure Domestic Violence Act Protection Order Harassment Emotional Abuse Procedural Fairness

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Glen Johnstone

Appellant

S [....] 1 L [....] S [....] 2

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Final Protection Order Under Domestic Violence Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's conduct constituted harassment and domestic violence under the Domestic Violence Act.
  2. 2 Whether the Magistrate's Court correctly issued a final protection order based on affidavit evidence.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent suffered harm as contemplated by the Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant's conduct, including obsessive messaging, phone tracking, threats, and subsequent acts such as fake social media accounts and malicious reports, constituted harassment and emotional abuse under the Domestic Violence Act. The evidence, particularly the WhatsApp messages and the respondent's affidavits, demonstrated a sustained pattern of controlling and abusive behaviour that caused psychological harm. The appellant's denials regarding responsibility for the post-breakup incidents were implausible and unsupported. The respondent's delay in seeking protection was explained by the complexities of domestic violence, including emotional manipulation and fear....

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs. Final protection order confirmed.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.
  • The final protection order issued by the Magistrate's Court remains in force.