Grütter v Lombard and Another

The appellant, Mr Grütter, and the first respondent, Mr Lombard, were attorneys practising from shared premises in Pretoria under the name 'Grütter and Lombard'. They were not partners but independently ran their own practices while sharing facilities and overheads. In 2004 the second respondent, Ms Oosthuizen, joined Lombard. In early 2005 Grütter terminated the association and began practising elsewhere under a different name. Lombard and Oosthuizen nevertheless continued to practise under the name 'Grütter and Lombard'. Despite Grütter’s demand that they cease using his name, they refused. Grütter applied to the High Court for an interdict prohibiting the use of his name. The High Court dismissed the application, holding that the name belonged to a partnership and could be used after dissolution. Grütter appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld with costs. The order of the High Court was set aside and replaced with an order prohibiting the respondents from using the name ‘Grütter’ in the description of their practice, from representing that Grütter was associated with them, and directing them to remove his name from all materials within 30 days. The respondents were ordered to pay costs jointly and severally.

This case is a leading authority in South African law on the protection of personality rights, particularly the right to identity and name, under the actio injuriarum. It affirms that the unauthorised appropriation of a person’s name for commercial advantage can constitute an injuria and links common-law personality rights to the constitutional value of human dignity in section 10 of the Constitution.