A.M v S.D (AR 220/2022)
A.M v S.D (AR 220/2022) [2023] ZAKZPHC 48; 2023 (2) SACR 296 (KZP) (12 May 2023)
The court found that only one of the four incidents alleged by the respondent was notionally actionable under the Protection from Harassment Act, as the first incident predated the Act's commencement and the third and fourth incidents were not sufficiently oppressive or repetitive. The second incident, while actionable, did not meet the threshold of overwhelming oppressiveness required for a single act to justify a protection order. The evidence did not establish a course of conduct with a repetitive element, nor did it show harassment of related persons. The magistrate's order was therefore…
Source excerpt
- Protection From Harassment Act
- Harassment
- Protection Order
- Retrospective Application
- Course Of Conduct