Kassel v Thompson Reuters (Markets) SA (16/34227) [2018] ZAGPJHC 413; 2019 (1) SA 251 (GJ) (12 June 2018)

Kassel v Thompson Reuters (Markets) SA (16/34227) [2018] ZAGPJHC 413; 2019 (1) SA 251 (GJ) (12 June 2018)

The court found that the listing of Mr Kassel as a PEP in the World-Check database is not defamatory. The designation of PEP status is based on the office held and does not imply any wrongdoing or adverse conduct. The reasonable reader, particularly in the context of financial institutions using World-Check, would understand that PEP status is a regulatory risk assessment and not an accusation of misconduct. The editorial guidelines and Wolfsberg Group recommendations are methodologies for risk assessment and do not create a presumption of wrongdoing. The retention of Mr Kassel's listing after vacating office may be an incorrect assessment of risk but is not defamatory. Accordingly, Mr...

Citation
[2018] ZAGPJHC 413
Parties
Applicant: David Kassel; Respondent: Thompson Reuters (Markets) SA
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 June 2018
Case Number
16/34227
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Judgment on Application for Interdict and Defamation
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
David Unterhalter
Legal Topics
Defamation, Interdict, Politically Exposed Persons, Editorial Guidelines, Risk Assessment
Delict Commercial and Corporate Defamation Interdict Politically Exposed Persons Editorial Guidelines Risk Assessment

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Kassel

Applicant

Thompson Reuters (Markets) SA

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Judgment on Application for Interdict and Defamation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the continued listing of Mr Kassel as a politically exposed person (PEP) in the World-Check database is defamatory.
  2. 2 Whether Mr Kassel is entitled to interdictory relief preventing Thompson Reuters from publishing his name as a PEP.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the listing of Mr Kassel as a PEP in the World-Check database is not defamatory. The designation of PEP status is based on the office held and does not imply any wrongdoing or adverse conduct. The reasonable reader, particularly in the context of financial institutions using World-Check, would understand that PEP status is a regulatory risk assessment and not an accusation of misconduct. The editorial guidelines and Wolfsberg Group recommendations are methodologies for risk assessment and do not create a presumption of wrongdoing. The retention of Mr Kassel's listing after vacating office may be an incorrect assessment of risk but is not defamatory. Accordingly, Mr...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the respondent, including the costs consequent upon the employment of two counsel.