South Africa Case Law

Helen Suzman Foundation v South African Broadcasting Corporation Soc Ltd and Others (52160/16)

Helen Suzman Foundation v South African Broadcasting Corporation Soc Ltd and Others (52160/16) [2016] ZAGPPHC 606 (20 July 2016)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

52160/16

Judge

Murphy

The High Court granted an interim interdict stopping the SABC’s censorship decision and requiring compliance with constitutional and broadcasting obligations pending review.

• Freedom Of Expression
• Broadcasting Regulation
• Interim Interdict
• Editorial Discretion
• Constitutional Rights
• Freedom-of-expression

Lewis v Media 24 Limited (C88/2007)

Lewis v Media 24 Limited (C88/2007) [2010] ZALCCT 41 (4 May 2010)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

C88/2007

Judge

Cheadle

The applicant failed to establish, on a balance of probabilities, that Media 24 Limited discriminated against him on the grounds of religion, culture, or political belief. The evidence showed that the editorial decisions and work requirements were based on operational needs and legitimate editorial discretion, not on prohibited grounds. The applicant did not inform the respondent of his religious affiliation, and there was no evidence that the respondent knew or should have known of his need to observe Shabbat. The rejection of articles was due to editorial standards and not racial profiling.…

Source excerpt

• Employment Equity Act
• Unfair Discrimination
• Religious Discrimination
• Editorial Discretion
• Contractual Terms
• Harassment

Lewis v Media 24 Ltd (C88/2007)

Lewis v Media 24 Ltd (C88/2007) [2010] ZALC 218; (2010) 31 ILJ 2416 (LC) (4 May 2010)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

C88/2007

Judge

Cheadle

The applicant failed to establish that he was treated differently on the grounds of religion, culture, or political belief. The evidence showed that the respondent did not know of the applicant's religious affiliation and did not require him to work in breach of his religious practices knowingly. The editorial decisions regarding article rejection were based on legitimate editorial concerns, not discriminatory policies. The applicant's claims of harassment and differential treatment were exaggerated and unsupported by credible evidence. The termination of his contract was due to performance a…

Source excerpt

• Employment Equity Act
• Unfair Discrimination
• Religious Discrimination
• Contractual Termination
• Harassment
• Editorial Discretion