Abstract:
A case of anti-constitutional common-law development. This case tells the story of an egotistical husband and the fading principle of the horizontal application of the Bill of Rights. The husband alleged that his wife had an affair with the managing director ("MD") of her firm (par 3). He claimed damages for both loss of consortium and insult from the MD (par 2). After an eight day trial, luridly exposing the private sex lives of the three people involved, Vorster AJ held that the MD was liable to compensate the husband for both heads of damage (par 2). On appeal, Brand JA overturned that decision. There are two moments in the unanimous Supreme Court of Appeal ("SCA") judgment.
