South African Human Rights Commission v Lagardien
Case: South African Human Rights Commission v Lagardien (2023/2391)
Court: Equality Court, Eastern Cape Division of the High Court, East London
Next hearing: TBC (before Pakati J)
Status: Awaiting judgment
Last updated: 28 July 2025
*****
Case overview: On 19 July 2023, the South African Human Rights Commission (“Complainant”) instituted proceedings in terms of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000 (“PEPUDA”) against Dawood Lagardien (“Respondent”). The proceedings stem from a sign that the Respondent displayed outside his business premises stating “LGBTIQ not welcome at La Gardi, save our children“. The Respondent is also alleged to have created a WhatsApp group called “Our rights – anti LTBTQ+”.
The Complainant argues that the sign and the WhatsApp group amount to hate speech, harassment, and unfair discrimination in terms of PEPUDA and seek to compel the Respondent to remove the sign and desist from promoting, demonstrating, or propagating incitement to harm, hatred, unfair discrimination, or harassment on the ground of sexual orientation in terms of PEPUDA, including through the WhatsApp group. The Respondent argues that as a practising Muslim, he believes that same sex relationships are “un-Islamic and amoral” and that he is obliged to take steps to prevent children from being exposed to “amoral behaviors”. As a result, the sign is a permissible form of expression based on his freedom of religion.
Media Monitoring Africa (“MMA”), represented by Power Law Africa, successfully applied to intervene in this matter as amicus curiae (friend of the court) on 15 April 2024. In the same hearing, the court admitted the Commission for Gender Equality as a Second Applicant
At the hearing of this matter on 28 July 2025:
- MMA advanced arguments on finding an appropriate balance between the rights to freedom of religion, freedom of expression, equality, and dignity, including the international law position on religious justifications and the rights of members of the LGTBIQ+ community.
- MMA brought the Equality Court’s attention to considerations applicable when navigating different forms of public and private communication.
- MMA advnaced brief submissions on the remedy sought, with a focus on restorative and alternative justice.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the Complainant (First Applicant), Second Applicant, and the Respondent were granted leave to file supplementary heads of argument by the end of August 2025 to address certain matters that arose during the hearing. Judgment is reserved pending the filing of the parties’ final written submissions.
Timothy Lloyd and Tina Power appeared on behalf of MMA during the course of this matter, with support from Claire Dehosse.
Court papers:
- Second Applicant’s Heads of Argument (1 August 2024)
- Amicus curiae’s Application for Admission (26 March 2024)
- Complainant’s Heads of Argument (3 April 2024)
- Respondent’s Heads of Argument (March 2024)
- Amicus curiae’s Heads of Argument (12 April 2024)
Press:
- News24, Gqeberha shop owner who put up anti-LGBTQI+ sign is ‘using Islam’ as excuse to discriminate – SAHRC (16 April 2024)
Attorneys:
