After six years, the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) has settled its case against the Beloftebos wedding venue in Stanford, in the Western Cape, without consulting at least one of the affected same-sex couples.
The settlement between the SAHRC and Beloftebos owners Coia and Andries de Villiers was made an order of the Equality Court in the Western Cape Division of the High Court on 15 April 2026 and stamped by the registrar on 23 April.
Case Rooted in Refusal to Host Same-Sex Weddings
The case stems from two incidents. In 2017, the venue refused to host the wedding of same-sex couple Alex Thorne and Alex Lu. In 2020, it again turned away Sasha-Lee Heekes and Megan Watling. The de Villiers cited their Christian beliefs about marriage as the reason for their actions.
While the SAHRC took no action in 2017, public outrage following the second incident prompted the commission to take Beloftebos to the Equality Court for violating the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act (PEPUDA).
No Compensation or Penalties Imposed
In the settlement, the parties agree to bring the matter to an end without requiring any compensation for the couples affected by Beloftebos’s discriminatory practices.
The SAHRC accepts that the owners did not intend to hurt or offend anyone by refusing to host same-sex couples, acknowledging the sincerity of their religious beliefs, including the belief that marriage is “a sacred union between a man and woman.”
On their part, the de Villiers say they “appreciate” that their conduct “constituted a prima facie case of unfair discrimination” under PEPUDA.
In the agreement, the de Villiers also apologise to one of the couples, Thorne and Lu, “for offence and hurt that their refusal in terms of their beliefs to host them at Beloftebos has caused and appreciate that [they] do not share and cannot be compelled to share the same views and beliefs that Mr and Mrs de Villiers hold.”
Beloftebos has since stopped hosting weddings for the public. However, the owners undertake that, should they resume offering the venue to the general public “for state-sanctioned marriages and/or civil unions, [they…] will not refuse these services to any person on the basis of that person’s sexual orientation.”
SAHRC Apology and Controversial Framing
Despite their apology, the agreement also frames the Beloftebos owners as victims who have suffered harm in the matter, despite their actions triggering the dispute.
The SAHRC, for example, apologises to Beloftebos for not attempting to resolve the matter through mediation before taking it to the Equality Court in 2020.
The commission also acknowledges “that the Beloftebos owners, their families and staff have suffered tremendous personal hurt and financial losses as a result of hateful comments that have been published about them and misunderstandings arising out of this matter.”
The SAHRC further calls on those involved to “accept the good faith of all in finding an amicable resolution” and urges them “to refrain from making derogatory and hateful comments about Mr and Mrs de Villiers or any other party in this matter.”
Notably, the owners are not required to pay any penalties or compensate the couples affected by their actions.
This contrasts with cases such as the 2023 Steve Hofmeyr Equality Court hate speech settlement, in which the singer agreed to pay an LGBTIQ+ organisation R100,000 in compensation for his discriminatory remarks.
Affected Couple Not Consulted
It remains unclear whether the SAHRC consulted Alex Thorne and Alex Lu, who emigrated several years ago, about the settlement. However, MambaOnline can confirm that Sasha-Lee Heekes and Megan Watling were not consulted.
Although listed among the respondents in the case, Heekes and Watling are otherwise not referenced in the settlement. The agreement also does not include an apology to them from the de Villiers.
The couple, who have previously criticised how the SAHRC handled the case, said that “the first time we saw the signed agreement was after it had already been made an order of the court, and then only after a great deal of effort was expended to obtain a copy.”
No Accountability?
Heekes and Watling criticised the settlement for excluding them, describing it as “a hollow outcome” that offers no accountability, sets no precedent, and makes no substantive findings on the merits of the case.
They added that it was “an agreement that apologises to the respondents, calls for public silence about their conduct, and leaves the underlying legal question, whether ‘sincerely held religious belief’ can justify the commercial refusal of service to same-sex couples, entirely unanswered for the next venue, the next florist, the next caterer.”
The couple also objected to the SAHRC agreeing to cover its own legal costs using public funds, arguing that Beloftebos, as the party responsible for the discrimination, should have been held liable.
Heekes and Watling said they are considering their legal options. MambaOnline has approached the SAHRC for comment on the matter.
