Manyi v Dhlamini (36077/13) [2018] ZAGPPHC 563 (18 July 2018)

Manyi v Dhlamini (36077/13) [2018] ZAGPPHC 563 (18 July 2018)

The court found that the statements made by the defendant on WhatsApp were defamatory, impugning the plaintiff's dignity, reputation, and moral character. The threat of 'necklacing' constituted injuria and psychological harm, violating the plaintiff's rights under sections 10 and 12 of the Constitution. The publication was wide, given the nature of social media. The defendant failed to defend the matter or tender an apology. The quantum of damages was determined by considering the seriousness of the defamation, the extent of publication, the plaintiff's reputation, and the conduct of the defendant. The court awarded R50,000 for defamation and R5,000 for the threat, finding these amounts...

Citation
[2018] ZAGPPHC 563
Parties
Plaintiff: Mwanele Manyi; Defendant: Mcebo Freedom Dhlamini
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 July 2018
Case Number
36077/13
Procedural Posture
Civil Action / Default Judgment
Outcome
Judgment granted in favour of the plaintiff. Defendant ordered to pay damages and costs.
Judges
N.M. Mavundla
Legal Topics
Defamation, Injuria, Psychological Harm, Quantum of Damages, Social Media Publication
Delict Defamation Injuria Psychological Harm Quantum of Damages Social Media Publication

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 6 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mwanele Manyi

Plaintiff

Mcebo Freedom Dhlamini

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action / Default Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the statements made by the defendant on WhatsApp constitute defamation against the plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether the threat of 'necklacing' amounts to injuria and psychological harm.
  3. 3 What is the appropriate quantum of damages for the defamation and threat claims.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the statements made by the defendant on WhatsApp were defamatory, impugning the plaintiff's dignity, reputation, and moral character. The threat of 'necklacing' constituted injuria and psychological harm, violating the plaintiff's rights under sections 10 and 12 of the Constitution. The publication was wide, given the nature of social media. The defendant failed to defend the matter or tender an apology. The quantum of damages was determined by considering the seriousness of the defamation, the extent of publication, the plaintiff's reputation, and the conduct of the defendant. The court awarded R50,000 for defamation and R5,000 for the threat, finding these amounts...

Court Disposition

Judgment granted in favour of the plaintiff. Defendant ordered to pay damages and costs.

Orders

  • Defendant is ordered to pay the plaintiff R50,000 in respect of claim A (defamation).
  • Defendant is ordered to pay the plaintiff R5,000 in respect of claim B (threat/injuria).