Gwe v De Lange and Another (3532/09) [2019] ZAECPEHC 65; [2020] 1 BLLR 92 (ECP) ; (2020) 41 ILJ 341 (ECP) (17 September 2019)

Gwe v De Lange and Another (3532/09) [2019] ZAECPEHC 65; [2020] 1 BLLR 92 (ECP) ; (2020) 41 ILJ 341 (ECP) (17 September 2019)

The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish the essential elements of the actio iniuriarum. The letters and conduct complained of were issued in compliance with statutory and disciplinary requirements, and any publication of the allegations was limited to those with a right or duty to know, such as the plaintiff, his union, and relevant officials. The court held that such publication was protected by qualified privilege and was not wrongful. There was no evidence of animus iniuriandi or malice on the part of the defendants. The plaintiff himself communicated the allegations to his union and wife, which did not constitute actionable publication. Any grievances regarding...

Citation
[2019] ZAECPEHC 65
Parties
Plaintiff: Richard Malibongwe Gwe; Defendant: Henriëtta De Lange; Defendant: Member of the Executive Council for Health, Province of the Eastern Cape
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 September 2019
Case Number
3532/09
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Final Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's action dismissed with costs.
Judges
Swanepoel AJ
Legal Topics
Actio Iniuriarum, Qualified Privilege, Disciplinary Code, Publication of Defamatory Statement, Vicarious Liability, Unfair Labour Practice
Delict Labour Law Actio Iniuriarum Qualified Privilege Disciplinary Code Publication of Defamatory Statement Vicarious Liability Unfair Labour Practice

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Malibongwe Gwe

Plaintiff

Henriëtta De Lange

Defendant

Member of the Executive Council for Health, Province of the Eastern Cape

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the letters and conduct of the defendants constituted defamatory publication against the plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether the publication of the allegations of sexual misconduct was wrongful and actionable under the actio iniuriarum.
  3. 3 Whether the employer's conduct was protected by qualified privilege under labour law and the disciplinary code.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish the essential elements of the actio iniuriarum. The letters and conduct complained of were issued in compliance with statutory and disciplinary requirements, and any publication of the allegations was limited to those with a right or duty to know, such as the plaintiff, his union, and relevant officials. The court held that such publication was protected by qualified privilege and was not wrongful. There was no evidence of animus iniuriandi or malice on the part of the defendants. The plaintiff himself communicated the allegations to his union and wife, which did not constitute actionable publication. Any grievances regarding...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's action dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
  • The plaintiff is ordered to pay the costs of suit.