RH v DE 2014 6 SA 436 (SCA) : a case of anti-constitutional common-law development

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Zitzke, Emile
dc.date.accessioned 2016-04-15T05:28:29Z
dc.date.available 2016-04-15T05:28:29Z
dc.date.issued 2015
dc.description.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. en_ZA
dc.description.department Jurisprudence en_ZA
dc.description.librarian am2016 en_ZA
dc.description.uri http://www.dejure.up.ac.za en_ZA
dc.identifier.citation Zitzke, E. 2015, ‘RH v DE 2014 6 SA 436 (SCA) : a case of anti-constitutional common-law development', De Jure, pp. 467-480, http://dx.DOI.org/ 10.17159/2225-7160/2015/v48n2a12. en_ZA
dc.identifier.issn 1466-3597
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/2263/52015
dc.language.iso en en_ZA
dc.publisher Pretoria University Law Press en_ZA
dc.rights Pretoria University Law Press en_ZA
dc.subject Egotistical husband en_ZA
dc.subject Bill of Rights en_ZA
dc.subject Affair en_ZA
dc.subject Managing director en_ZA
dc.subject Common-law development en_ZA
dc.title RH v DE 2014 6 SA 436 (SCA) : a case of anti-constitutional common-law development en_ZA
dc.type Article en_ZA


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record