A single ‘slanderous’ e-mail accusing a manager of gender bias has come under the legal spotlight in one of the first cases unpacking the provisions of SA’s relatively new anti-harassment laws, says a report in The Mercury. And while the KZN judge tasked with considering the matter agreed that the content of the e-mail was not true, she said the law required that there be some ‘repetitive element’ to the conduct or, if it was a single act, that it must be ‘overwhelmingly oppressive’ and have the same impact on its victim as if being ‘physically stalked’.

The case before Judge Mohini Moodley (with Judge Johan Ploos van Amstel concurring) was an appeal by a Mondi employee against a finding by a magistrate that her actions, in sending out the e-mail about her supervisor, constituted ‘harassment in the workplace’. Moodley agreed there was no convincing evidence of the abuse complained of. However, she said – as the Act only came into effect three years ago – there was little jurisprudence on it and on the definition of ‘harassment’.

The Law Reform Commission had recommended the definition include a recurring element of the conduct. While this, ultimately, had not been included in the wording, ‘in my view the conduct engaged in must necessarily either have a repetitive element which makes it oppressive and unreasonable, thereby tormenting or inculcating serious fear or distress in the victim’. The judge upheld the appeal and set aside the magistrate’s ruling.

Full report in The Mercury (subscription needed)