Divorce law v free expression onus now on Minister
Publish date: 09 April 2008
Issue Number: 2045
Diary: Legalbrief Today
Category: Constitutional
The Justice Minister bears the onus of establishing that section 12 of the Divorce Act violates the right to freedom of expression in a manner that is constitutionally justifiable, the publisher of the Sunday Times said in its written arguments to the Constitutional Court.
In February, the Johannesburg High Court declared the section inconsistent with the Constitution and referred the matter to the Constitutional Court for confirmation of the sections invalidity, says a report in Business Day. The case concerned Claire Mandels efforts to prevent the public from knowing about the paternity lawsuit filed by her former husband. The former husband claimed Mandel made a false representation concerning the paternity of a son born in 1975 and claimed damages of just over R1m. The court granted an interim order against the publisher, restraining the newspaper from publishing the matter arising out of proceedings for damages instituted by Mandels former husband, Ian Difford. However, Acting Judge Nazeer Cassim ruled in favour of the Sunday Times. In its application for the order of constitutional invalidity, Johncom Media (now Avusa) said that if the Minister sought the suspension of an order of constitutional invalidity, she was required to make a case to this effect and was obliged to indicate how long it would take for Parliament to correct this constitutional defect. Avusa said she had not done that. Full Business Day report
