Manyatshe v M & G Media Ltd and Others (415/08) [2009] ZASCA 96 (17 September 2009)

Manyatshe v M & G Media Ltd and Others (415/08) [2009] ZASCA 96 (17 September 2009)

The appeal was dismissed as moot because the allegedly defamatory article had already been published, rendering any interdict ineffective and the judgment without practical effect. The court found no exceptional circumstances or important unresolved questions of law that would justify adjudicating the appeal despite its mootness. The appellant's reliance on Suliman for a blanket ban on publication of the identity of persons against whom criminal charges have been laid was rejected as too broad and not supported by precedent. The court reaffirmed the need to balance freedom of expression and reputation, noting that the principles applied by the court a quo were well-established. The...

Citation
[2009] ZASCA 96
Parties
Appellant: Maanda Manyatshe; Respondent: M & G Media Limited; Respondent: Ferial Haffejee; Respondent: Stefaans Brummer; Respondent: Sam Sole; Respondent: Media 24 Ltd; Respondent: Nicholas Dawes
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 September 2009
Case Number
415/08
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (johannesburg), Following Dismissal of Urgent Application for Interim Interdict
Outcome
Appeal dismissed as moot under section 21A of the Supreme Court Act 59 of 1959.
Judges
Navsa, Brand, Mlambo, Mhlantla, Bosielo
Legal Topics
Interim Interdict, Defamation, Freedom of Expression, Balance of Convenience, Constitutional Rights, Mootness
Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Commercial and Corporate Interim Interdict Defamation Freedom of Expression Balance of Convenience Constitutional Rights +1 more

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 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maanda Manyatshe

Appellant

M & G Media Limited

Respondent

Ferial Haffejee

Respondent

Stefaans Brummer

Respondent

Sam Sole

Respondent

Media 24 Ltd

Respondent

Nicholas Dawes

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (johannesburg), Following Dismissal of Urgent Application for Interim Interdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appeal against the dismissal of an urgent application for an interim interdict to prevent publication of an allegedly defamatory article is moot due to prior publication.
  2. 2 Whether the appeal raises important questions of law justifying adjudication despite mootness.
  3. 3 Whether the principles governing pre-publication interdicts and the balance between freedom of expression and reputation were correctly applied.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed as moot because the allegedly defamatory article had already been published, rendering any interdict ineffective and the judgment without practical effect. The court found no exceptional circumstances or important unresolved questions of law that would justify adjudicating the appeal despite its mootness. The appellant's reliance on Suliman for a blanket ban on publication of the identity of persons against whom criminal charges have been laid was rejected as too broad and not supported by precedent. The court reaffirmed the need to balance freedom of expression and reputation, noting that the principles applied by the court a quo were well-established. The...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed as moot under section 21A of the Supreme Court Act 59 of 1959.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs, including the costs occasioned by the employment of two counsel.