, FUR2601 ASSIGNMENT 2 SEMESTER 2 2025
DUE DATE: 2025
QUESTION 1 (12 marks)
Scenario 1
The facts in this scenario illustrate how women are often subjected to gendered stereotypes
such as being labelled “aggressive”, “emotional”, or “hysterical” when they assert themselves
in professional or personal contexts. Such conduct amounts to unfair discrimination on the
grounds of sex and gender. Section 9 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa,
1996 (the equality clause) guarantees everyone the right to equal protection and benefit of
the law, while expressly prohibiting discrimination on the basis of gender1. The Promotion of
Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000 (PEPUDA) gives
legislative effect to this constitutional guarantee and prohibits gender stereotyping that
impairs a person’s dignity2. Where these remarks occur in an employment context, the
Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 (EEA) also applies, as it prohibits discrimination in any
employment policy or practice3.
The woman in this scenario has standing (locus standi) in terms of section 38 of the
Constitution, which entitles anyone acting in their own interest or on behalf of another to
approach a court to vindicate rights. Section 20 of PEPUDA further provides that any person
who has been unfairly discriminated against may institute proceedings in the Equality Court4.
In terms of jurisdiction, the Equality Court established under PEPUDA would be competent
to hear the matter. If the discriminatory labels were made in a workplace setting, then the
Labour Court or the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA)
would have jurisdiction to resolve the dispute5.
Appropriate remedies would include declaratory relief that the conduct constituted unfair
discrimination, damages for impairment of dignity, and systemic remedies such as sensitivity
training for perpetrators. The Equality Court also has the discretion to order apologies and
the adoption of equality plans6.
1
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, s 9.
2
Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000, s 6.
3
Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998, s 6.
4
Constitution, 1996, s 38; PEPUDA, s 20.
5
FUR2601 Study Guide, Unit 4 (Jurisdiction and enforcement of rights).
6
PEPUDA, s 21 (Remedies).
DUE DATE: 2025
QUESTION 1 (12 marks)
Scenario 1
The facts in this scenario illustrate how women are often subjected to gendered stereotypes
such as being labelled “aggressive”, “emotional”, or “hysterical” when they assert themselves
in professional or personal contexts. Such conduct amounts to unfair discrimination on the
grounds of sex and gender. Section 9 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa,
1996 (the equality clause) guarantees everyone the right to equal protection and benefit of
the law, while expressly prohibiting discrimination on the basis of gender1. The Promotion of
Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000 (PEPUDA) gives
legislative effect to this constitutional guarantee and prohibits gender stereotyping that
impairs a person’s dignity2. Where these remarks occur in an employment context, the
Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 (EEA) also applies, as it prohibits discrimination in any
employment policy or practice3.
The woman in this scenario has standing (locus standi) in terms of section 38 of the
Constitution, which entitles anyone acting in their own interest or on behalf of another to
approach a court to vindicate rights. Section 20 of PEPUDA further provides that any person
who has been unfairly discriminated against may institute proceedings in the Equality Court4.
In terms of jurisdiction, the Equality Court established under PEPUDA would be competent
to hear the matter. If the discriminatory labels were made in a workplace setting, then the
Labour Court or the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA)
would have jurisdiction to resolve the dispute5.
Appropriate remedies would include declaratory relief that the conduct constituted unfair
discrimination, damages for impairment of dignity, and systemic remedies such as sensitivity
training for perpetrators. The Equality Court also has the discretion to order apologies and
the adoption of equality plans6.
1
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, s 9.
2
Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000, s 6.
3
Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998, s 6.
4
Constitution, 1996, s 38; PEPUDA, s 20.
5
FUR2601 Study Guide, Unit 4 (Jurisdiction and enforcement of rights).
6
PEPUDA, s 21 (Remedies).
