Hargey and Another v Moosagie (2188/2021) [2022] ZAECQBHC 11 (26 May 2022)

Hargey and Another v Moosagie (2188/2021) [2022] ZAECQBHC 11 (26 May 2022)

The court found that the defendant's exception was ill-founded as it was directed at individual paragraphs rather than the whole cause of action. The alleged lack of particularity did not render the particulars of claim vague and embarrassing to the extent that the defendant could not plead thereto. The elements of defamation were clearly pleaded, and the extent of publication was set out with sufficient detail. Any remedy for lack of detail lies in requesting further particulars, not in an exception. The exception was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2022] ZAECQBHC 11
Parties
Plaintiff: Dr Taj Hargey; Plaintiff: The Open Mosque; Defendant: Mohammed Aadiel Moosagie
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Gqeberha
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 May 2022
Case Number
2188/2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure / Exception to Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Exception dismissed with costs.
Judges
O H Ronaasen
Legal Topics
Defamation, Vague and Embarrassing Pleading, Exception Procedure, Particularity in Pleadings
Civil Procedure Delict Defamation Vague and Embarrassing Pleading Exception Procedure Particularity in Pleadings

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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Taj Hargey

Plaintiff

The Open Mosque

Plaintiff

Mohammed Aadiel Moosagie

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Procedure / Exception to Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs' particulars of claim are vague and embarrassing to the extent that the defendant cannot plead thereto.
  2. 2 Whether the particulars of claim lack sufficient particularity to sustain a cause of action for defamation.
  3. 3 Whether the exception is properly directed at the whole cause of action or merely at individual paragraphs.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant's exception was ill-founded as it was directed at individual paragraphs rather than the whole cause of action. The alleged lack of particularity did not render the particulars of claim vague and embarrassing to the extent that the defendant could not plead thereto. The elements of defamation were clearly pleaded, and the extent of publication was set out with sufficient detail. Any remedy for lack of detail lies in requesting further particulars, not in an exception. The exception was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Exception dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The exception is dismissed with costs.