Search legal guides

Search MJ Kotze Inc legal guides and articles

Data, Privacy & Website

Website Terms of Use in South Africa

Enforceable terms and conditions for your website or web app — built around real assent, ECTA section 43 disclosures, and liability limits that survive the Consumer Protection Act.

Written by

Martin Kotze

Attorney, Conveyancer & Notary Public

Last reviewed:

Quick answer

What are website terms of use?

Website terms of use — also called terms and conditions, terms of service, or simply the “T&Cs” — are the contract that governs how visitors and registered users may access and use a website or web application. They set out what users are permitted to do, what conduct is prohibited, who owns the content on the site, how user-generated content is treated, and how risk and liability are allocated between the site operator and the user. There are two common ways terms are presented. Browsewrap terms are simply posted via a footer link and the operator argues that continued use signals acceptance. Clickwrap terms require the user to take an active step — ticking an “I agree” box or clicking “Accept” — before proceeding. In South Africa both can form a contract, but clickwrap produces far stronger evidence of consensus (agreement), which is why account sign-ups, checkouts, and any high-stakes site should use it. Terms of use are distinct from a privacy policy, which deals with how personal information is processed; a good set of terms links to the privacy policy rather than duplicating it.

Are website terms of use legally binding in South Africa?

Yes. Website terms of use are binding in South Africa as an ordinary contract, provided the user has genuinely assented to them and the terms meet the normal requirements of contract — consensus, lawfulness, certainty, and possibility. The Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002 (ECTA) removes any doubt that an online agreement is valid: under section 11, information is not without legal force merely because it is in the form of a data message, and under section 22 an agreement can be concluded wholly or partly by data messages. Terms can be incorporated by reference — that is, made part of the contract through a link — if they are reasonably accessible to the user, which is why the link must be conspicuous and the terms must be readable before the user commits. The practical fault line is assent: a clickwrap mechanism, where the user actively ticks “I agree”, gives strong proof of agreement, whereas browsewrap — terms buried in a footer with no active acceptance — is far weaker and a court may find the user never agreed to a clause they had no real notice of. Where the user is a consumer, the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 (CPA) shapes what the terms can say: sections 48 to 52 strike down unfair, unreasonable or unjust terms, and section 49 requires that any clause limiting the operator’s liability, imposing an indemnity, or assuming risk be drawn to the consumer’s attention in plain language and, for serious risks, separately acknowledged. A liability cap hidden in dense browsewrap is exactly the kind of clause a court can refuse to enforce against a consumer.
Information is not without legal force and effect merely on the grounds that it is wholly or partly in the form of a data message (s 11), and an agreement may be formed wholly or partly by means of data messages (s 22) — so an online agreement, and terms incorporated by reference into it, are legally valid.
Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002, ss 11 & 22
A supplier offering goods or services for sale, hire or exchange by way of an electronic transaction must make available specified information on the website — including its identity, contact details, a description of the goods or services, the full price, and the terms of the agreement — before the consumer places an order.
Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002, s 43
A supplier must not offer to supply goods or services on terms that are unfair, unreasonable or unjust (s 48), and any term that limits the supplier’s risk or liability, constitutes an assumption of risk by the consumer, or imposes an indemnity must be drawn to the consumer’s attention in a conspicuous, plain-language manner before the agreement is concluded (s 49).
Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008, ss 48–49

When you need a Website Terms of Use

  • When you launch any public website, web app, or online platform where you want to set the rules for use, protect your content, and limit your liability for the information you publish.
  • When users can create accounts, log in, or interact with the site — a clickwrap “I agree” at sign-up is the cleanest way to prove they accepted your terms.
  • When the site allows user-generated content — comments, reviews, uploads, profiles — and you need a licence to host and display that content plus rules against unlawful or abusive material.
  • When you sell, hire out, or exchange goods or services by electronic means, where ECTA section 43 requires specific supplier and pricing information to be disclosed on the site.
  • When your users may be consumers, so your disclaimers, liability caps and indemnities must be drafted to survive the Consumer Protection Act rather than be struck down as unfair.

What a Website Terms of Use should contain

1

Acceptance and assent mechanism

State clearly how the user accepts the terms and when they become bound. For anything important, require active clickwrap acceptance (a ticked “I agree” box) rather than relying on passive browsewrap, because South African courts look for real consensus. Record that continued use after a change constitutes acceptance only where that is genuinely communicated.

2

Permitted use and prohibited conduct

Define what users may and may not do on the site — for example no unlawful, infringing, defamatory, or malicious activity, no scraping or reverse-engineering, no interference with security. Clear conduct rules give you a contractual basis to suspend or terminate accounts and to remove offending content.

3

Intellectual property in site content

Confirm that the text, design, logos, code, and other content on the site belong to you (or your licensors) and that users get only a limited, revocable licence to view and use the site for its intended purpose. This stops users copying or republishing your material and protects your brand and content.

4

User-generated content licence

Where users post content, take a licence from them to host, display, reproduce, and adapt that content as needed to operate the site, and require them to warrant they have the rights to post it. Without this licence you have no clear right to display what users upload, and no recourse if their content infringes someone else’s rights.

5

Third-party links and content

Make clear that links to external sites are provided for convenience, that you do not control or endorse third-party content, and that the user follows such links at their own risk. This limits your exposure for material on sites you do not operate and for changes to third-party services you integrate with.

6

Disclaimers and limitation of liability

Disclaim warranties on the accuracy and availability of the site and cap or exclude your liability for loss arising from its use, to the extent the law allows. Where users are consumers, section 49 of the Consumer Protection Act requires these clauses to be conspicuous and in plain language, and the most serious risk-shifting terms separately acknowledged — a buried cap is unenforceable against a consumer.

7

Indemnity

Require users to indemnify you against claims arising from their breach of the terms or their misuse of the site — for example claims over content they posted. As an indemnity is one of the clauses singled out by section 49 of the CPA, it must be brought to a consumer’s attention clearly rather than hidden in the body of the terms.

8

Governing law, jurisdiction and changes

Specify that South African law governs and identify the courts that have jurisdiction, and set out how you may amend the terms and how changes take effect (with notice, and a “last updated” date). Include the ECTA section 43 supplier and pricing disclosures where you transact online, and link prominently to your privacy policy.

Browsewrap vs clickwrap terms in South Africa

FeatureBrowsewrapClickwrap
How presentedPosted via a footer or “Terms” link; no active acceptanceUser must tick “I agree” or click “Accept” to proceed
Proof of assentWeak — relies on arguing that use implies agreementStrong — a recorded, deliberate act of acceptance
Risk of a clause being unenforceableHigher — a user may show they had no real noticeLower — notice and agreement are evidenced
Best forLow-stakes, purely informational sitesSign-ups, checkouts, accounts, any binding obligation
CPA section 49 clauses (liability, indemnity, risk)Likely to fail the “conspicuous, drawn to attention” testCan be surfaced and acknowledged at the point of acceptance

Common South African pitfalls

  • Relying on browsewrap for binding obligations: posting terms behind a footer link and assuming users are bound is risky. South African courts look for genuine assent, so account, payment and other high-stakes flows should use active clickwrap acceptance, not passive browsewrap.
  • Burying liability caps and indemnities in dense text: where users are consumers, section 49 of the Consumer Protection Act requires limitation-of-liability, risk and indemnity clauses to be conspicuous and in plain language, with the most serious drawn separately to the consumer’s attention. A hidden cap can be refused enforcement.
  • Ignoring ECTA section 43 disclosures on a commercial site: if you offer goods or services for sale, hire or exchange by electronic means, ECTA requires you to publish your identity, contact details, a description, the full price, and the terms. Leaving these out lets the consumer cancel the transaction within 14 days of receiving the goods or services under section 43 — a separate remedy from the 7-day cooling-off right in section 44.
  • Over-broad or unfair terms: a clause that is one-sided, surprises the consumer, or shifts unreasonable risk can be struck down under sections 48 to 52 of the CPA. Drafting terms that are reasonable and balanced is what keeps them enforceable, not stacking the deck against the user.
  • No user-generated content licence: hosting reviews, comments or uploads without taking a licence from users leaves you with no clear right to display their content and no warranty that it is theirs to post. This exposes you to takedown and infringement claims.
  • Treating the terms as the privacy policy: terms of use govern how the site may be used; they do not satisfy POPIA’s separate duty to tell users how their personal information is processed. The two are different documents — link the privacy policy from the terms rather than collapsing them into one.

Frequently asked questions

Are website terms of use legally binding in South Africa?

Yes. Website terms are binding as an ordinary contract once the user has genuinely assented to them. The Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002 confirms that online agreements have full legal force and that terms can be incorporated by reference if they are reasonably accessible. Active clickwrap acceptance gives the strongest proof of agreement.

What is the difference between browsewrap and clickwrap?

Browsewrap terms are simply posted via a link and rely on the argument that using the site implies acceptance. Clickwrap terms require the user to take an active step — ticking “I agree” or clicking “Accept”. In South Africa both can form a contract, but clickwrap gives far stronger evidence of consensus, so it should be used for accounts, checkouts and any binding obligation.

Do I legally need terms and conditions on my website?

There is no single law that compels every website to have terms, but they are strongly advisable to allocate risk, protect your content and set the rules for use. If you sell, hire out or exchange goods or services electronically, section 43 of ECTA requires you to publish specific supplier, pricing and contractual information on the site, which the terms typically carry.

Can I limit my liability in my website terms?

Yes, but within limits. You can disclaim warranties and cap liability, however where users are consumers section 49 of the Consumer Protection Act requires any clause limiting liability, imposing an indemnity, or shifting risk to be conspicuous and in plain language, with the most serious risks separately acknowledged. A liability cap buried in browsewrap can be unenforceable against a consumer.

What is the difference between terms of use and a privacy policy?

Terms of use are a contract governing how people may use your site — permitted conduct, intellectual property, liability and so on. A privacy policy is a separate POPIA notice that tells users how their personal information is collected and processed. They serve different purposes, so you need both, with the terms linking to the privacy policy.

Does the Consumer Protection Act apply to my website terms?

It applies where your users are consumers — broadly, natural persons and smaller juristic persons dealing with you in the ordinary course of your business. Then sections 48 to 52 prohibit unfair, unreasonable or unjust terms and section 49 governs how liability, indemnity and risk clauses must be presented. Business-to-business dealings above the CPA threshold are less constrained but still governed by the common law.

Can I change my website terms after users have agreed?

You can, if the terms reserve the right to amend and you communicate changes properly. Simply altering the posted terms and relying on continued use is weak, especially for important changes. Best practice is to give notice, show a “last updated” date, and for material changes obtain fresh acceptance so there is clear evidence the user agreed to the new version.

Who owns content that users post on my site?

The user generally retains ownership of what they create, but your terms should take a licence from them to host, display and adapt that content so you can operate the site lawfully. The terms should also require users to warrant they have the rights to post the content and to indemnify you against claims arising from it.

Sources & authority

This guide is general information, not legal advice. It reflects the law as at June 2026.

Get your Website Terms of Use reviewed or drafted

Upload an existing document for a fixed-fee review, or have a bespoke Website Terms of Use drafted for your business — personally, by a senior corporate and commercial attorney. No obligation to proceed.

Review: Fixed fee from R8 325 (excl. VAT) · 24-hour turnaroundDraft: Fixed fee from R8 175 (excl. VAT)

For the businesses we act for

The Keystone Workspace

The attorney-designed platform the businesses we act for use to run their contracts, e-signatures and company secretarial work in one place.

Why you can trust this: Martin Kotze has been an admitted Attorney of the High Court of South Africa, registered Conveyancer, and Notary Public since 2014, practising from Pretoria. The firm is regulated by the Legal Practice Council under firm registration 17444.

This guide is general information, not legal advice for your specific matter.