South Africa Case Law

Kunene and Another v Malema (A2023/092235)

Kunene and Another v Malema (A2023/092235) [2025] ZAGPJHC 742 (5 August 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A2023/092235

Judges

Wilson, Mfenyana, Wentzel

The court held that Mr. Kunene's repeated use of the word 'cockroach' to describe Mr. Malema in a televised political debate constituted hate speech under section 10 of the Equality Act. The term 'cockroach' carries internationally recognised genocidal and dehumanising connotations, particularly in the context of political conflict, and its use was reasonably understood as intended to promote hatred and incite harm against Mr. Malema based on his political beliefs and conscience. The court rejected the argument that political affiliation cannot be a ground for hate speech, finding that consci…

Source excerpt

• Hate Speech
• Equality Act Section 10
• Political Expression
• Limits On Free Speech

Cape South African Jewish Board of Deputies v Torr (EC11/2025)

Cape South African Jewish Board of Deputies v Torr (EC11/2025) [2025] ZAEQC 4 (9 May 2025)

Court

Equality Court

Case number

EC11/2025

Judge

Le Grange

The respondent's videos, viewed contextually, propagated extreme, vile, and false accusations against Jewish people, including ritual murder, cannibalism, pedophilia, sexual violence, and inherent brutality. These statements were not bona fide artistic, academic, or scientific inquiry, nor fair and accurate reporting. The content was intended to incite harm and propagate hatred against Jewish people, falling squarely within the definition of hate speech under section 10(1) of PEPUDA. Freedom of expression under section 16 of the Constitution does not protect such speech. The respondent's cond…

Source excerpt

• Hate Speech
• Promotion Of Equality And Prevention Of Unfair Discrimination Act
• Freedom Of Expression
• Blood Libel
• Antisemitism

Arpin-Scholtz and Others v HH Durrheim (Pty) Ltd t.a Medipost Pharmacy and Another (EC2022/007843)

Arpin-Scholtz and Others v HH Durrheim (Pty) Ltd t.a Medipost Pharmacy and Another (EC2022/007843) [2024] ZAEQC 6 (12 December 2024)

Court

Equality Court

Case number

EC2022/007843

Judge

Malindi

The court found that the utterance 'julle is sif' was made in a private meeting and not communicated to any third party, as required by section 10(1) of PEPUDA and the Constitutional Court's interpretation in Qwelane. The evidence showed the boardroom was soundproof and the door was closed during the meeting, preventing dissemination. The court held that, even if the words were offensive, they did not amount to hate speech or harassment under the Act, as there was no public communication or incitement of harm. The applicants failed to establish a causal link between the utterance and the non-…

Source excerpt

• Hate Speech
• Unfair Discrimination
• Sexual Orientation
• Equality Court Jurisdiction
• Damages Claim
• Counterclaim

AfriForum v Economic Freedom Fighters and Others (1105/2022)

AfriForum v Economic Freedom Fighters and Others (1105/2022) [2024] ZASCA 82; [2024] 3 All SA 319 (SCA); 2024 (10) BCLR 1275 (SCA); 2024 (6) SA 1 (SCA) (28 May 2024)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1105/2022

Judges

Saldulker, Matojane, Molefe, Nhlangulela, Keightley

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the application for recusal of Acting Justice Keightley did not meet the objective test for bias, as her prior remarks did not demonstrate a reasonable apprehension of partiality. The issue estoppel defence was rejected because the interests of justice and equity did not support barring AfriForum's complaint, given the constitutional importance of the issues and the lack of complete identity of parties. On the merits, the Court found that the singing of 'Dubula ibhunu' and 'Shisa lamabhunu' by the respondents, in the context of EFF political events, did n…

Source excerpt

• Hate Speech
• Promotion Of Equality And Prevention Of Unfair Discrimination Act
• Freedom Of Expression
• Issue Estoppel
• Recusal Of Judge

Amaning and Others v Ackerman (EQ3/2023)

Amaning and Others v Ackerman (EQ3/2023) [2024] ZAEQC 2 (10 May 2024)

Court

Equality Court

Case number

EQ3/2023

Judge

GC Wright

The court found that the respondent, Mr Ackerman, used the k word in communications with Mr Wellman on three occasions. These communications, though not widely disseminated, were not within the intimate personal sphere and were sufficiently public to constitute 'communication' under section 10(1) of the Equality Act. The court rejected the respondent's argument that the communications were private and thus protected, holding that the context—a business relationship between two associates—did not attract the highest degree of privacy. The court relied on the purposive interpretation of section…

Source excerpt

• Hate Speech
• Unlawful Discrimination
• Harassment
• Promotion Of Equality And Prevention Of Unfair Discrimination Act
• Right To Dignity

City of Cape Town v Adams (EC06/2023)

City of Cape Town v Adams (EC06/2023) [2024] ZAEQC 1 (1 March 2024)

Court

Equality Court

Case number

EC06/2023

Judge

Mangcu-Lockwood

The court found that the respondent's repeated references to the Municipal Manager's origin from the Eastern Cape were not neutral geographic statements but coded language and a racial trope for 'Black African.' The utterances conveyed that Black African persons from the Eastern Cape are outsiders, incapable of caring for Coloured communities, and unqualified to lead in the Western Cape. This amounted to 'othering' and perpetuated the apartheid-era concept of separate development. The court held that the statements impaired the dignity of the Municipal Manager, undermined his leadership on th…

Source excerpt

• Hate Speech
• Unfair Discrimination
• Harassment
• Promotion Of Equality And Prevention Of Unfair Discrimination Act
• Freedom Of Expression Limitation

Afriforum v South African Human Rights Commission and Others (14370/2019 ; 31328/2019)

Afriforum v South African Human Rights Commission and Others (14370/2019 ; 31328/2019) [2023] ZAGPJHC 807; 2023 (6) SA 188 (GJ) (14 July 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

14370/2019 ; 31328/2019

Judge

Roland Sutherland

The South African Human Rights Commission is a creature of statute and its powers are strictly circumscribed by the South African Human Rights Commission Act 40 of 2013. Section 13(3) of the Act empowers the Commission to investigate alleged violations of human rights and to form an opinion on whether there is substance to a complaint, for the purpose of deciding whether to assist in bringing proceedings before a competent court. The Commission is not empowered to make definitive decisions on whether a contravention of section 10 of PEPUDA has occurred, nor to exonerate alleged violators. Any…

Source excerpt

• Ultra Vires
• Powers Of Chapter 9 Institutions
• Hate Speech
• Review Under Paja
• Equality Court Jurisdiction

Afriforum NPC v Nelson Mandela Foundation Trust and Others (371/2020)

Afriforum NPC v Nelson Mandela Foundation Trust and Others (371/2020) [2023] ZASCA 58; 2023 (4) SA 1 (SCA); [2023] 3 All SA 1 (SCA) (21 April 2023)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

371/2020

Judges

Maya P, Schippers JA, Plasket JA, Mabindla-Boqwana JA, Savage AJA

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the gratuitous public display of the old South African flag constitutes hate speech, unfair discrimination, and harassment under the Equality Act. The Court found that such displays are objectively harmful, incite harm, and promote hatred, particularly against black South Africans, and are a symbol of apartheid and white supremacy. The Court confirmed that the Equality Court has the power to grant declaratory relief regarding actual and prospective conduct, and that the prohibition is subject to the proviso in section 12, allowing bona fide artistic, acad…

Source excerpt

• Freedom Of Expression
• Hate Speech
• Unfair Discrimination
• Harassment
• Promotion Of Equality And Prevention Of Unfair Discrimination Act
• Bill Of Rights Limitation

Afriforum v Economic Freedom Fighters and Others (EQ 04/2020)

Afriforum v Economic Freedom Fighters and Others (EQ 04/2020) [2022] ZAGPJHC 777 (4 October 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

EQ 04/2020

Judge

Molahlehi

The High Court granted leave to appeal against its dismissal of Afriforum’s hate speech and unfair discrimination complaints, finding reasonable prospects of success and public interest.

• Hate Speech
• Promotion Of Equality And Prevention Of Unfair Discrimination Act
• Leave To Appeal
• Public Interest
• Leave-to-appeal
• Hate-speech

Afriforum v Economic Freedom Fighters and Others (EQ 04/2020)

Afriforum v Economic Freedom Fighters and Others (EQ 04/2020) [2022] ZAGPJHC 599; 2022 (6) SA 357 (GJ) (25 August 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

EQ 04/2020

Judge

Molahlehi

Afriforum failed to establish that the lyrics of the impugned songs, when interpreted in their political and cultural context, constitute hate speech or unfair discrimination under sections 10(1) and 7(a) of the Equality Act. The evidence presented by Afriforum, both expert and lay, did not demonstrate a clear intention by the respondents to incite harm or propagate hatred against any group. The expert witnesses for Afriforum lacked independence and neutrality, and their evidence was largely hearsay and uncorroborated. The respondents' evidence, including expert testimony, established that th…

Source excerpt

• Hate Speech
• Freedom Of Expression
• Promotion Of Equality And Prevention Of Unfair Discrimination Act
• Expert Evidence
• Damages
• Costs Order