University of Cape Town v Rhodes Must Fall and Others (20182/2015) [2015] ZAWCHC 151 (19 October 2015)
The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie right to the relief sought, based on evidence of ongoing disruption, intimidation, and occupation of University property by the respondents and associated persons. The conduct described was unlawful and prejudicial to the rights of the University, its...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] ZAWCHC 151
- Parties
- Applicant: University of Cape Town; Respondent: Rhodes Must Fall; Respondent: #Fees Must Fall; Respondent: Left Students Movement; Respondent: UCT Trans Collective; Respondent: SASCO UCT; Respondent: PASMA UCT; Respondent: Patriarchy Must Fall; Respondent: UCT Left Students Movement; Respondent: Thatho Phule; Respondent: Brian Kamanze; Respondent: Ru Slayen; Respondent: Mzomhle Bixa
- Court
- Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- 20182/2015
- Procedural Posture
- Urgent Application / Interim Interdict; Rule Nisi Issued
- Outcome
- Interim interdict granted; rule nisi issued; respondents to show cause on return date.
- Judges
- Yekiso
- Legal Topics
- Interim Interdict, Unlawful Occupation, Campus Disruption, 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
University of Cape Town
Applicant
Rhodes Must Fall
Respondent
#Fees Must Fall
Respondent
Left Students Movement
Respondent
UCT Trans Collective
Respondent
SASCO UCT
Respondent
PASMA UCT
Respondent
Patriarchy Must Fall
Respondent
UCT Left Students Movement
Respondent
Thatho Phule
Respondent
Brian Kamanze
Respondent
Ru Slayen
Respondent
Mzomhle Bixa
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interim Interdict; Rule Nisi Issued
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondents' conduct constitutes unlawful interference with the University's operations.
- 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to an interim interdict restraining disruptive and unlawful conduct on campus.
- 3 Whether the order should include provisions for enforcement and service.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie right to the relief sought, based on evidence of ongoing disruption, intimidation, and occupation of University property by the respondents and associated persons. The conduct described was unlawful and prejudicial to the rights of the University, its staff, and students. The urgency of the matter justified the granting of interim relief. The court issued a rule nisi, interdicting and restraining the respondents from engaging in specified disruptive and unlawful acts, and made provision for enforcement and service of the order. The interim interdict will operate pending the return date, at which the respondents may show...
Court Disposition
Interim interdict granted; rule nisi issued; respondents to show cause on return date.
Orders
- A rule nisi is issued calling upon the respondents to appear and show cause on 23 November 2015 why the interim interdict should not be made final.
- Respondents and any other persons are interdicted and restrained from disrupting or interfering with the normal activities of the University, including administration, lectures, tutorials, libraries, graduation ceremonies, and examinations.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
69 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN)
CASE NO: 20182/2015
2015/10/19
Before the Honourable Mr Justice Yekiso
CAPE TOWN: Monday, 19 October 2015
In the matter between:
UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN
Applicant
and
RHODES MUST FALL First
Respondent
#FEES MUST FALL Second
Respondent
LEFT STUDENTS MOVEMENT Third
Respondent
UCT TRANS COLLECTIVE Fourth
Respondent
SASCO UCT Fifth
Respondent
PASMA UCT Sixth
Respondent
PATRIARCHY MUST FALL Seventh
Respondent
UCT LEFT STUDENTS MOVEMENT Eighth
Respondent
THATHO PHULE Ninth
Respondent
BRIAN KAMANZE Tenth
Respondent
RU SLAYEN Eleventh
Respondent
MZOMHLE BIXA Twelfth
Respondent
·
DRAFT ORDER
HAVING HEARD COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT, IT IS ORDERED:
1. A Rule nisi is issued calling upon the Respondents to appear and show cause, if any, to the above Honourable Court on Monday 23 November 2015 at 10h00 or so soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, why an order should not be granted:
1.1 Interdicting and restraining the Respondents and any other persons from:
1.1.1 Disrupting or otherwise interfering in any way with the normal activities of the University including but not limited to:
1.1.1.1 the administration of the Applicant;
1.1.1.2 all lectures and tutorials on all campuses;
1.1.1.3 the work of the libraries;
1.1.1.4 graduation ceremonies; and
1.1.1.5 examinations and tests.
1.1.2 Barricading entrances to all the campuses of the Applicant;
1.1.3 Committing arson, vandalising, damaging or occupying any buildings on all campuses;
1.1.4 Intimidating, threatening, harassing or hanning:
1.1.4.1 any employees of the Applicant,
1.1.4.2 any students of the Applicant; or
1.1.4.3 any other persons present on the Applicant's campuses.
1.1.5 Inciting persons to enter or be upon the property of the Applicant for the purpose of unlawfully occupying or invading the property or threatening or preventing those persons lawfully entitled to occupy the property; and
1.1.6 Preventing Francis Petersen, Danie Visser, Russell Ally and Anwar Mall from returning to work.
1.2 Directing that, in the event of a failure by the Respondents, to comply with the above interdict, that the Sheriff of this Court,
assisted insofar as may be necessary by the South African Police Services, shall be authorised and directed to ensure compliance with the interdict
1.3 Directing that the Sheriff may remove all existing barricades and be authorised to remove any new barricades which may be erected;
2. Pending the return date, the provisions of paragraph 1 shall act as an interim interdict;
3. Respondents can anticipate the return day on 72 hours’ notice;
4. Service of this order shall be effected in the following manner by not later than 06:00 on 20 October 2015;
4.1 By email to all Students;
4.2 By posting it on the University's website;
4.3 By service by Sheriff on the Respondents by loud hailer;
4.4 By posting a copy thereof at all entrances to all University campuses; and
4.5 By e-mailing notice to the e-mail addresses of the Respondents.
BY ORDER OF COURT
_____________________
COURT REGISTRAR
FAIRBRIDGES WERTHEIM BEKKER
HIGH COURT BOX NO: 42