De Jager v Netcare Limited (42041/16)
De Jager v Netcare Limited (42041/16) [2024] ZAGPPHC 503 (23 May 2024)
The court held that the plaintiff's objection to the surveillance evidence raised a constitutional issue regarding the right to privacy under section 14 of the Constitution. However, the procedural requirements of Rule 16A of the Uniform Rules of Court had not been complied with, as no notice of the constitutional issue had been given to the registrar to afford interested parties the opportunity to be admitted as amicus curiae. The court determined that it was not in the interests of justice to dispense with Rule 16A and directed that the plaintiff comply with the rule within seven days. The…
Source excerpt
- Right To Privacy
- Admissibility Of Surveillance Evidence
- Rule 16a Notice
- Amicus Curiae
- Damages Quantification