Democratic Alliance v Rulumeni

The respondent, a member of the Democratic Alliance (DA) and former municipal councillor, applied to be placed on the DA’s candidate list for the 2016 local government elections. After initially being ‘red-flagged’ by the DA’s Electoral College and excluded from interviews, she successfully appealed and was granted an interview by the selection panel on 6 February 2016 at Bunker’s Hill Golf Estate. Due to logistical constraints, the interview was conducted in a room adjacent to the ladies’ toilets, described by the respondent as an ablution facility. She alleged that being interviewed in this venue shocked, humiliated and degraded her, infringing her dignity. She sued the DA under the actio iniuriarum for damages of R10 million. The High Court upheld her dignity claim but dismissed a related claim for pure economic loss. The DA appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld with no order as to costs on appeal. The High Court’s order was set aside to the extent that it upheld the dignity claim. The respondent’s claim under the actio iniuriarum was dismissed, and she was ordered to pay the costs of the action in the High Court, including the costs of two counsel.

The case clarifies the application of the actio iniuriarum in South African law, particularly the objective assessment of wrongfulness based on the legal convictions of the community and the strict requirement of intention to impair dignity. It underscores that subjective feelings of humiliation, without objectively wrongful conduct and animus iniuriandi, are insufficient to ground liability for infringement of dignity.