Sahara Computers (Pty) Ltd v G.G.M (A 189/2011) [2014] ZAGPPHC 475; (2014) 35 ILJ 2750 (GP) (2 June 2014)

Sahara Computers (Pty) Ltd v G.G.M (A 189/2011) [2014] ZAGPPHC 475; (2014) 35 ILJ 2750 (GP) (2 June 2014)

The court found that the Respondent was subjected to sexual harassment by a fellow employee, Mthethwa, and that the Appellant failed to take reasonable steps to protect her despite being aware of the ongoing harassment. The Appellant's response was inadequate and delayed, amounting to a negligent breach of its duty to provide a safe working environment. The Respondent suffered recognised psychiatric injury as confirmed by expert evidence, and the Appellant's omission was both unlawful and negligent. The trial court's award of damages and costs was justified, and the appeal was dismissed.

Citation
[2014] ZAGPPHC 475
Parties
Appellant: Sahara Computers (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: GG M[...]
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 June 2014
Case Number
A 189/2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Maumela, Dosio, Molopa-Sethosa
Legal Topics
Sexual Harassment, Employer Liability, Negligence, Psychiatric Injury, Duty of Care
Labour Law Delict Sexual Harassment Employer Liability Negligence Psychiatric Injury Duty of Care

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sahara Computers (Pty) Ltd

Appellant

GG M[...]

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Respondent was subjected to sexual harassment in the workplace.
  2. 2 Whether the Appellant negligently breached its duty to protect the Respondent from sexual harassment.
  3. 3 Whether the Respondent suffered a recognised psychiatric injury as a result of the harassment.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Respondent was subjected to sexual harassment by a fellow employee, Mthethwa, and that the Appellant failed to take reasonable steps to protect her despite being aware of the ongoing harassment. The Appellant's response was inadequate and delayed, amounting to a negligent breach of its duty to provide a safe working environment. The Respondent suffered recognised psychiatric injury as confirmed by expert evidence, and the Appellant's omission was both unlawful and negligent. The trial court's award of damages and costs was justified, and the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.