South African Transport and Allied Workers Union and Another v Garvas and Others

SATAWU organised a large public gathering in Cape Town as part of a strike in the security industry. Although notice was given under the Regulation of Gatherings Act and marshals were appointed, the gathering allegedly resulted in extensive riot damage to shops and vehicles owned by the respondents. The respondents sued SATAWU for damages under section 11(1) of the Regulation of Gatherings Act, which imposes strict liability on organisers for riot damage. SATAWU raised a constitutional challenge to section 11(2)(b) of the Act, arguing that the requirement that riot damage be both outside the scope of the gathering and not reasonably foreseeable rendered the statutory defence irrational and unconstitutional, and unjustifiably limited the right to assemble under section 17 of the Constitution.

Leave to appeal was granted, but the appeal was dismissed. Section 11(2) of the Regulation of Gatherings Act was upheld as constitutionally valid.

This case is a leading authority on organiser liability for riot damage in South Africa and clarifies the constitutional balance between freedom of assembly and the protection of the public from violence and property damage. It affirms that the right to assemble is protected only when exercised peacefully and confirms the constitutionality of strict statutory liability for organisers, subject to a narrowly defined defence.