The application to interdict the Springboks from the Rugby world Cup was abandoned on Thursday last week. The application, bought by the Agency for a New Agenda (ANA) against the South Africa Rugby Football Union (SARFU) and the Minister of Sport, ambitiously asked the court for an order that the passports of the 31 man squad be surrendered, and that a commission of enquiry be launched in order to address the lack of transformation in South African Rugby.
While the merits of the application are interesting and worthy of further discussion, so too is the legal mechanism on which ANA sought to rely.
Generally, to be granted interdictory relief, one must show at the very least a clear right to the relief sought; an actual or threatened invasion of some other right; and the absence of another suitable remedy. The court always has discretion to refuse an interdict, even if all the requirements have been met.
Taking this all into account, it would have been interesting to see, failing settlement, whether the papers in this application were able to make a case meeting these high thresholds.