Mkhize v Media 24 Limited (362/2007) [2008] ZAKZHC 21; [2008] 4 All SA 267 (N) (17 March 2008)

Mkhize v Media 24 Limited (362/2007) [2008] ZAKZHC 21; [2008] 4 All SA 267 (N) (17 March 2008)

The court found that the defendant published a defamatory statement about the plaintiff, a prominent political figure, without the necessary qualification that the evidence was hearsay. The defendant's persistent refusal to acknowledge the error and apologise until shortly before trial aggravated the harm to the plaintiff's reputation. The court considered previous awards for defamation, the wide circulation of the publication, and the plaintiff's impeccable reputation. Although the defendant eventually tendered an apology, it was too late to mitigate the harm fully. The court held that a monetary award was justified and determined that R150,000 was appropriate compensation. The...

Citation
[2008] ZAKZHC 21
Parties
Plaintiff: Zwelini Lawrence Mkhize; Defendant: Media 24 Limited
Court
High Courts - Kwazulu Natal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 March 2008
Case Number
362/2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial on Damages for Defamation
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff with damages and costs.
Judges
Hugo
Legal Topics
Defamation, Quantum of Damages, Apology and Retraction, Public Interest Reporting
Delict Civil Procedure Defamation Quantum of Damages Apology and Retraction Public Interest Reporting

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zwelini Lawrence Mkhize

Plaintiff

Media 24 Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial on Damages for Defamation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the published article was defamatory of the plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's conduct in publishing the article and its subsequent response warranted an award of damages.
  3. 3 What quantum of damages is appropriate in the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant published a defamatory statement about the plaintiff, a prominent political figure, without the necessary qualification that the evidence was hearsay. The defendant's persistent refusal to acknowledge the error and apologise until shortly before trial aggravated the harm to the plaintiff's reputation. The court considered previous awards for defamation, the wide circulation of the publication, and the plaintiff's impeccable reputation. Although the defendant eventually tendered an apology, it was too late to mitigate the harm fully. The court held that a monetary award was justified and determined that R150,000 was appropriate compensation. The...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff with damages and costs.

Orders

  • The plaintiff is awarded R150,000 in damages with costs on an attorney and client scale, including costs of senior counsel.
  • The defendant shall publish the tendered apology (as amended by the parties) in City Press in a manner at least as prominent as the original article.