South African Transport and Allied Workers’ Union v Garvis and Others

On 16 May 2006 the South African Transport and Allied Workers’ Union (SATAWU) organised a protest march in Cape Town arising from a strike in the security sector. The gathering, regulated under the Regulation of Gatherings Act 205 of 1993, degenerated into a riot causing extensive damage to vehicles, shops and property, and injury to individuals. Several affected individuals sued the Union in the Western Cape High Court for damages in terms of section 11 of the Act, which imposes statutory liability on organisers of gatherings that result in riot damage. SATAWU defended the action and raised a constitutional challenge to section 11(2)(b) of the Act, arguing that it imposed an onerous and illusory defence, infringing the right to freedom of assembly in section 17 of the Constitution. The High Court separated and determined the constitutional issue, rejecting the challenge. SATAWU appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was dismissed. The declaration by the High Court that section 11(2)(b) of the Regulation of Gatherings Act is constitutionally valid was confirmed. No order as to costs was made.

This case is a leading authority on the constitutional validity of statutory liability for riot damage under the Regulation of Gatherings Act. It clarifies the scope of section 17 of the Constitution by confirming that only peaceful and unarmed assemblies are protected. The judgment affirms that organisers of gatherings may be held liable for riot damage, while also confirming that section 11(2) provides a meaningful defence. It balances the protection of protest rights with the need to safeguard the public from mob violence and property damage.