Communication Specialists CC v Poulter (CA540/2002) [2003] ZAECHC 1 (9 January 2003)

Communication Specialists CC v Poulter (CA540/2002) [2003] ZAECHC 1 (9 January 2003)

The respondent proved the existence of a contract for payment for services rendered between June and December 2000, and the amount claimed was established. The letter from the appellants contained objectively insulting and offensive statements, which, when tested against societal norms, constituted a wrongful act and actionable injuria. The respondent's dignity was impaired, satisfying all elements required for injuria. However, the damages awarded by the magistrate were excessive given the nature and limited publication of the insult. The award was reduced to R1,000. Each party was ordered to pay their own costs of appeal, as the appellants only succeeded in reducing the damages for...

Citation
[2003] ZAECHC 1
Parties
Appellant: Communication Specialists CC; Appellant: Johan Basson; Respondent: Mike Poulter
Court
High Courts - Eastern Cape
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 January 2003
Case Number
CA540/2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Magistrate's Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal partially upheld: damages for injuria reduced from R3,000 to R1,000; appeal otherwise dismissed; each party to pay their own costs of appeal.
Judges
L.E. Leach, N. Mhlantla
Legal Topics
Injuria, Assessment of Damages, Wrongful Insult, Business Relationships
Delict Civil Procedure Injuria Assessment of Damages Wrongful Insult Business Relationships

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Communication Specialists CC

Appellant

Johan Basson

Appellant

Mike Poulter

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Magistrate's Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent proved a contractual entitlement to payment for services rendered between June and December 2000.
  2. 2 Whether the letter from the appellants constituted an actionable injuria against the respondent.
  3. 3 Whether the damages awarded for injuria were excessive.

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent proved the existence of a contract for payment for services rendered between June and December 2000, and the amount claimed was established. The letter from the appellants contained objectively insulting and offensive statements, which, when tested against societal norms, constituted a wrongful act and actionable injuria. The respondent's dignity was impaired, satisfying all elements required for injuria. However, the damages awarded by the magistrate were excessive given the nature and limited publication of the insult. The award was reduced to R1,000. Each party was ordered to pay their own costs of appeal, as the appellants only succeeded in reducing the damages for...

Court Disposition

Appeal partially upheld: damages for injuria reduced from R3,000 to R1,000; appeal otherwise dismissed; each party to pay their own costs of appeal.

Orders

  • The damages awarded by the magistrate in respect of injuria are reduced from R3,000 to R1,000.
  • The magistrate's award is altered accordingly.