Midi Television (Pty) Ltd v Director of Public Prosecutions (Western Cape) (100/06) [2007] ZASCA 56; [2007] 3 All SA 318 (SCA); 2007 (9) BCLR 958 (SCA); 2007 (5) SA 540 (SCA); 2007 (2) SACR 493 (SCA) (18 May 2007)

Midi Television (Pty) Ltd v Director of Public Prosecutions (Western Cape) (100/06) [2007] ZASCA 56; [2007] 3 All SA 318 (SCA); 2007 (9) BCLR 958 (SCA); 2007 (5) SA 540 (SCA); 2007 (2) SACR 493 (SCA) (18 May 2007)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the order compelling Midi Television to provide the documentary to the DPP prior to broadcast was not supported by any law, statute, or constitutional provision. The mere possibility or speculation of prejudice to the administration of justice does not justify prior restraint. The limitation of media freedom must be justified under section 36 of the Constitution, requiring demonstrable and substantial prejudice and a real risk thereof. No such risk was established on the evidence. The DPP's concerns were speculative, and there was no clear right entitling him to pre-publication access. The law presumes freedom to publish unless a valid law restricts...

Citation
[2007] ZASCA 56
Parties
Appellant: Midi Television (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions (Western Cape)
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 May 2007
Case Number
100/06
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Final Interdict Granted by High Court
Outcome
Appeal upheld; High Court order set aside and substituted with refusal of the application.
Judges
Howie, Nugent, Cloete, Lewis, Snyders
Legal Topics
Freedom of Expression, Prior Restraint, Contempt of Court, Bill of Rights Limitation, Media Broadcasting, Fair Trial Rights
Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Telecoms and Media Freedom of Expression Prior Restraint Contempt of Court Bill of Rights Limitation Media Broadcasting +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 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Midi Television (Pty) Ltd

Appellant

Director of Public Prosecutions (Western Cape)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Final Interdict Granted by High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a court may prohibit the broadcast of a documentary by a media house unless the Director of Public Prosecutions is first permitted to view it.
  2. 2 Whether such prior restraint is constitutionally permissible under the Bill of Rights and the limitation clause.
  3. 3 Whether any law obliges a broadcaster to furnish material to the DPP before publication.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the order compelling Midi Television to provide the documentary to the DPP prior to broadcast was not supported by any law, statute, or constitutional provision. The mere possibility or speculation of prejudice to the administration of justice does not justify prior restraint. The limitation of media freedom must be justified under section 36 of the Constitution, requiring demonstrable and substantial prejudice and a real risk thereof. No such risk was established on the evidence. The DPP's concerns were speculative, and there was no clear right entitling him to pre-publication access. The law presumes freedom to publish unless a valid law restricts...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; High Court order set aside and substituted with refusal of the application.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs, including the costs of two counsel.
  • The order of the court below is set aside.