Council for Medical Schemes and Another v Selfmed Medical Scheme and Another (561/2010) [2011] ZASCA 207 (25 November 2011)

Council for Medical Schemes and Another v Selfmed Medical Scheme and Another (561/2010) [2011] ZASCA 207 (25 November 2011)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the statements in the Council's Annual Report did not refer to Selfmed Medical Scheme as an entity, but rather to individual officers. The statements were not assertions of fact but reflected ongoing governance concerns under investigation by the Council. The reasonable reader, considering the context and the extract as a whole, would not interpret the statements as defamatory of either Selfmed or Bester. The court found that the statements were not likely to lower the respondents in the estimation of right-thinking members of society. Consequently, the appeal was upheld, the claims for defamation were dismissed, and the cross-appeal for punitive...

Citation
[2011] ZASCA 207
Parties
Appellant: Council for Medical Schemes; Appellant: Registrar of Medical Schemes; Respondent: Selfmed Medical Scheme; Respondent: Leon Bester
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 November 2011
Case Number
561/2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Outcome
Appeal upheld; claims for defamation dismissed with costs; cross-appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Navsa, Van Heerden, Ponnan, Malan, Petse
Legal Topics
Defamation, Corporate Governance, Qualified Privilege, Statutory Immunity
Delict Civil Procedure Defamation Corporate Governance Qualified Privilege Statutory Immunity

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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Council for Medical Schemes

Appellant

Registrar of Medical Schemes

Appellant

Selfmed Medical Scheme

Respondent

Leon Bester

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the statements in the Council's Annual Report referred to Selfmed Medical Scheme as an entity.
  2. 2 Whether the statements were defamatory of either or both respondents.
  3. 3 Whether the defence of privilege or statutory immunity applied to the publication.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the statements in the Council's Annual Report did not refer to Selfmed Medical Scheme as an entity, but rather to individual officers. The statements were not assertions of fact but reflected ongoing governance concerns under investigation by the Council. The reasonable reader, considering the context and the extract as a whole, would not interpret the statements as defamatory of either Selfmed or Bester. The court found that the statements were not likely to lower the respondents in the estimation of right-thinking members of society. Consequently, the appeal was upheld, the claims for defamation were dismissed, and the cross-appeal for punitive...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; claims for defamation dismissed with costs; cross-appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs.
  • The order of the court below is replaced with: 'The claims are dismissed with costs.'