du Plessis v J T Publishing (EDMS) Beperk (751/2005) [2007] ZAGPHC 41 (25 May 2007)

du Plessis v J T Publishing (EDMS) Beperk (751/2005) [2007] ZAGPHC 41 (25 May 2007)

The court found that the publication was defamatory, degrading, and a grave attack on the plaintiff's integrity and moral character. The manipulated image and accompanying text suggested an addiction to oral sex, which was false and malicious. The defendant's conduct, including the lack of apology and withdrawal of defence, aggravated the harm. The plaintiff's reputation as a prominent gospel singer was seriously affected. The court exercised its discretion to accept the plaintiff's affidavit on quantum, noting the absence of opposition and the sufficiency of the evidence. Considering comparable awards and the seriousness of the defamation, the court determined that R60,000.00 was...

Citation
[2007] ZAGPHC 41
Parties
Plaintiff: Juanita du Plessis; Defendant: J T Publishing (EDMS) Beperk; Defendant: Eugene Godfrey Godard
Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 May 2007
Case Number
751/2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Quantum Determination After Withdrawal of Defence
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff against the first defendant for R60,000.00 in damages, with interest and costs.
Judges
Mavundla
Legal Topics
Defamation, Quantum of Damages, Sentimental Damages, Unlawful Publication
Delict Defamation Quantum of Damages Sentimental Damages Unlawful Publication

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Juanita du Plessis

Plaintiff

J T Publishing (EDMS) Beperk

Defendant

Eugene Godfrey Godard

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Quantum Determination After Withdrawal of Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the publication by the first defendant was defamatory of the plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to damages for defamation and, if so, the appropriate quantum.
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of the defendant aggravates the damages to be awarded.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the publication was defamatory, degrading, and a grave attack on the plaintiff's integrity and moral character. The manipulated image and accompanying text suggested an addiction to oral sex, which was false and malicious. The defendant's conduct, including the lack of apology and withdrawal of defence, aggravated the harm. The plaintiff's reputation as a prominent gospel singer was seriously affected. The court exercised its discretion to accept the plaintiff's affidavit on quantum, noting the absence of opposition and the sufficiency of the evidence. Considering comparable awards and the seriousness of the defamation, the court determined that R60,000.00 was...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff against the first defendant for R60,000.00 in damages, with interest and costs.

Orders

  • Judgment against the first defendant in favour of the plaintiff in the amount of R60,000.00.
  • First defendant to pay interest at 15.5% per annum a tempore morae on R60,000.00 from date of service of summons to date of payment.