Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

Judgment by UFS’s Prof Tameshnie Deane challenges Supreme Court precedent in landmark domestic violence case

04 March 2025 | Story Tshepo Tsotetsi | Photo Supplied

A judgment by Prof Tameshnie Deane, Vice-Dean of Research, Postgraduate Studies and Internationalisation at the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Faculty of Law, has been published in South African Criminal Law Reports (SACLR), in recognition of its groundbreaking contribution to South African domestic violence law.

Prof Deane’s May 2024 judgment in the case GD v NB (2025(1) SACR 179) challenged a restrictive Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) precedent and expanded the interpretation of ‘domestic relationships’ under the Domestic Violence Act. Her ruling has not only reshaped legal understanding but also reinforced the UFS’s commitment to impactful legal scholarship.

South African Criminal Law Reports is a monthly report of criminal law and procedure cases from superior courts in Southern Africa. The cases highlighted in each issue are chosen for their importance to criminal law practitioners.

Challenging established precedents

Prof Deane’s judgment effectively challenged a precedent set by the SCA in Daffy v Daffy (2012), marking a significant shift in legal interpretation under the Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998 (DVA).

The GD v NB case revolves around domestic violence and the issuance of a protection order under the DVA. The appellant (the person who appealed the original court’s decision), who was married to the sister of the respondent (the person who must answer the claims), argued that their relationship did not fall under the domestic relationship criteria for a protection order. This argument relied heavily on the SCA’s decision in Daffy v Daffy, where the court had narrowly defined a ‘domestic relationship’ as being limited to cohabitation or close familial ties. In the Daffy case, two brothers were denied protection under the DVA, as their strained business relationship was deemed insufficient to fall under the scope of domestic violence protections.

Expanding the definition of domestic relationships

Prof Deane, however, disagreed with the restrictive interpretation applied in that case. “I concluded that this constrictive interpretation of a ‘domestic relationship’ seemingly ignores the intended aims of the DVA,” she explained. In her judgment, she argued that the DVA was intended to offer protection in a wide range of domestic relationships, and that the previous ruling failed to consider the evolving dynamics of modern familial ties.

By drawing on the broader, evolving understanding of domestic violence, Prof Deane expanded the definition of a “domestic relationship” to include relationships based on familial obligations, even where they may not involve cohabitation or direct consanguinity (direct blood relation). She cited specific details in the GD v NB case where the appellant and respondent were involved in the care of the respondent’s mother. “The relationship between the appellant and respondent extends beyond business matters to include familial obligations,” she noted. The ruling in GD v NB granted the appellant a protection order, acknowledging that their relationship met the broader definition of domestic violence protection under the DVA.

Adapting the law to contemporary realities

Her judgment reinforced that domestic violence can occur in diverse familial structures and that protection under the DVA should not be limited by narrow definitions. “Society is constantly changing, and the law must adapt accordingly to ensure relevance and that the widest possible protections are afforded to those in a wide range of domestic relationships,” Prof Deane emphasised. Her judgment serves as a response to South Africa’s high rates of domestic violence, ensuring that the law accommodates and responds to the diverse situations in which domestic violence occurs.

This landmark ruling contributes significantly to the ongoing development of South African law, furthering the protection of domestic violence victims and ensuring that the DVA is applied in a way that reflects the realities of contemporary society. Prof Deane’s decision highlights the importance of the law adapting to social changes, offering broader protection and safeguarding the rights of vulnerable individuals within complex and varied domestic environments. This judgment also positions the UFS as a leader in advancing legal thought and contributing meaningfully to the evolution of South African law.

News Archive

Letter to students from Prof Jonathan Jansen about student protest action at the UFS

2015-10-21

Dear Students

Student protest action at the University of the Free State

I wish to make clear that the senior leadership of the University of the Free State understands and supports the demands from students and their leaders that higher education be accessible to all students, especially the poor. For the past six years we have done everything in our power to meet that commitment to students who are academically talented, but simply cannot afford to pay; that is why our tuition fees remain among the lowest in the country. Our efforts to raise private funding have enabled thousands more students to study at the UFS than would have been possible on the government subsidy only. Whether it is the Staff Fund contributions (yes, our staff empty their pockets to support student fees) or the No Student Hungry (NSH) bursary programme (yes, we raise funds for food bursaries), we will continue our drive to fund students who cannot afford higher education. Let me repeat, no student with a solid academic record will be denied access to studies simply because they cannot pay.

Now, to the matter at hand. There is a national demand from students for a 0% fee increment for 2016. The Minister’s response, after consultation with stakeholders, was that universities should cap their 2016 fee increases at 6%. Despite this initiative from government, the protests continue on virtually all campuses across South Africa for the ‘no fee’ increase.

Our response, as the UFS leadership, is to continue engaging the SRC as the chosen leadership of our students in trying to negotiate a settlement on the matter. We have worked around the clock to be available to student leaders to find some resolution on 2016 fees. While we understand the demands of students, as university leaders, we can only work with the government subsidy we receive. Any agreement reached, cannot and must not place the university at academic and financial risk in its ability to deliver public higher education to the country - if that happens, everybody loses. Still, no matter what happens in terms of the response from government, the leadership door at the UFS remains open to finding a mutually acceptable solution to all parties in these deliberations.

Students, we are deeply concerned by the violence, intimidation and threats from the small group of protesting students. These dangerous and demeaning behaviours, like disrupting classes and verbally abusing students and staff, undermine the legitimate quest of students for relief concerning tuition fees. Such behaviour is completely unacceptable and the university will take action where required. We must also remember that we have an obligation to all 30 000 students whose right to learn without fear of violence and intimidation must be respected.

In conclusion, over the past few years we have worked hard to build a culture of mutual respect and embrace as we worked through some very difficult challenges on campus. You would have noticed that the university leadership responded quickly and sympathetically to reason and respect in difficult situations of rage and demonstration. A minority of students, with some outsiders, have come onto the campus to break down that culture in which, while we might disagree, we continue to work on the basis of mutual respect. I urge all students that, as we engage of this important problem of enabling greater access to higher education, we continue to remain true to the core values of our Human Project.

Best Regards

Prof Jonathan Jansen
Vice-Chancellor and Rector
University of the Free State

Letter to students from Prof Jonathan Jansen about student protest actions at the UFS (Pdf format)

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept