Els v Weideman and Another (3392/2008) [2011] ZAWCHC 449 (7 December 2011)

Els v Weideman and Another (3392/2008) [2011] ZAWCHC 449 (7 December 2011)

The court held that the breach of the interdictory order by the respondents constituted a serious contempt of court, undermining the dignity, repute, and authority of the judiciary. In determining sentence, the court considered the seriousness of the offence, the interests of society in upholding the rule of law, and the personal and corporate circumstances of the offenders. The court found that imprisonment, correctional supervision, or suspended sentences were inappropriate given the nature of the offenders and the circumstances. The only suitable sentence was the imposition of fines, calibrated to reflect the gravity of the offence and the status of the respondents. The court imposed a...

Citation
[2011] ZAWCHC 449
Parties
Applicant: Jurie Christiaan Els; Respondent: Esmare Weideman; Respondent: Media24 (Pty) Ltd
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 December 2011
Case Number
3392/2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Contempt Application / Sentencing After Remittal From Supreme Court of Appeal
Outcome
The respondents were found guilty of contempt of court and sentenced to pay fines. Costs were awarded against them jointly and severally.
Judges
Dlodlo
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Interdictory Relief, Media Freedom, Sentencing Principles
Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Contempt of Court Interdictory Relief Media Freedom Sentencing Principles

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jurie Christiaan Els

Applicant

Esmare Weideman

Respondent

Media24 (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Contempt Application / Sentencing After Remittal From Supreme Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate sanction for contempt of court committed by the respondents in breach of an interdictory order?
  2. 2 How should the court balance the interests of society, the seriousness of the offence, and the personal circumstances of the offenders in sentencing for contempt?
  3. 3 Is a fine the suitable sentence for contempt in these circumstances, and what quantum is appropriate?

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the breach of the interdictory order by the respondents constituted a serious contempt of court, undermining the dignity, repute, and authority of the judiciary. In determining sentence, the court considered the seriousness of the offence, the interests of society in upholding the rule of law, and the personal and corporate circumstances of the offenders. The court found that imprisonment, correctional supervision, or suspended sentences were inappropriate given the nature of the offenders and the circumstances. The only suitable sentence was the imposition of fines, calibrated to reflect the gravity of the offence and the status of the respondents. The court imposed a...

Court Disposition

The respondents were found guilty of contempt of court and sentenced to pay fines. Costs were awarded against them jointly and severally.

Orders

  • The first respondent is sentenced to pay a fine of R15,000.
  • The second respondent is sentenced to pay a fine of R60,000.