Brandt v Independent Newspapers (PTY) Limited (45168/2011) [2018] ZAGPPHC 733 (21 September 2018)

Brandt v Independent Newspapers (PTY) Limited (45168/2011) [2018] ZAGPPHC 733 (21 September 2018)

The court found that the Defendant's publication was a fair and accurate report of the judgment delivered in open court, and that the journalist attended the proceedings and reported what was said by the judge. The Defendant discharged the onus of proving that the publication was germane to the issues and made in the discharge of a duty to inform the public. The Plaintiff failed to rebut the defence of qualified privilege, as he did not file a replication nor prove that the statements lacked foundation or were motivated by malice. The court held that public policy justified the publication and that the conduct of the Defendant and its reporter met the standard of reasonableness expected...

Citation
[2018] ZAGPPHC 733
Parties
Plaintiff: Peter Don Brandt; Defendant: Independent Newspapers (PTY) Limited
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 September 2018
Case Number
45168/2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Final Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.
Judges
Prinsloo
Legal Topics
Defamation, Qualified Privilege, Media Law, Fair and Accurate Report, Onus of Proof
Delict Civil Procedure Defamation Qualified Privilege Media Law Fair and Accurate Report Onus of Proof

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Don Brandt

Plaintiff

Independent Newspapers (PTY) Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the newspaper article published by the Defendant was wrongful and defamatory of the Plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant's publication was protected by qualified privilege as a fair and accurate report of court proceedings.
  3. 3 Whether the Plaintiff rebutted the defence of qualified privilege by proving lack of foundation or improper motive.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Defendant's publication was a fair and accurate report of the judgment delivered in open court, and that the journalist attended the proceedings and reported what was said by the judge. The Defendant discharged the onus of proving that the publication was germane to the issues and made in the discharge of a duty to inform the public. The Plaintiff failed to rebut the defence of qualified privilege, as he did not file a replication nor prove that the statements lacked foundation or were motivated by malice. The court held that public policy justified the publication and that the conduct of the Defendant and its reporter met the standard of reasonableness expected...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The claim is dismissed.
  • The Plaintiff is ordered to pay the costs.