The life of a journalist is not easy. The profession of a journalist, and in particular that of an investigative journalist, is seldom appreciated. More than often it is criticised. The public often frowns upon the reporting of a journalist. His or her actions are continuously subjected to criticism of alleged biasness or sensation. Seldom a word of gratitude is expressed.
 The foregoing is at the forefront in this application.
 A number of journalists are the applicants. There are 11 in number. All are seasoned journalists. The first applicant is an entity established to protect its members. The second to twelfth applicants have authorised the president of the first applicant to represent them in these proceedings. In addition, the second to twelfth applicants act in their personal capacity.
 The first respondent is the Black First Land First organisation. The second respondent is the founder and president of the first respondent.
 The applicants have approached this court by way of urgency seeking interdictory relief, whether final or interim, against the respondents.
 The respondents have filed an answering affidavit, deposed to by the second respondent. The respondents raise a number of points in limine. These relate inter alia to the issue of urgency, the locus standi of the first applicant, and the requirements of interdictory relief, in particular that of a reasonable apprehension of harm and the availability of an alternative remedy.
South African National Editors Forum and Others v Black First Land First and Others (23897/17)  ZAGPJHC 1790.40 MB