Mokotong v Sishen Iron Ore Company (Pty) Ltd (98428/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 536 (22 July 2017)

Mokotong v Sishen Iron Ore Company (Pty) Ltd (98428/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 536 (22 July 2017)

The court held that conduct, not limited to spoken or written words, can constitute a defamatory statement if it conveys an imputation that lowers the plaintiff's reputation in the eyes of others. The manner of the plaintiff's dismissal—being escorted by security and removed from the premises—was capable of being understood as implying serious misconduct, which is per se defamatory. However, the claim for special damages (loss of future income) arising from the alleged defamation was unsustainable because the plaintiff failed to plead the necessary elements of Aquilian liability, including wrongfulness and falsity, as required by law. The first and second exceptions were dismissed, while...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 536
Parties
Plaintiff: Mashilo Mokotong; Defendant: Sishen Iron Ore Company (Pty) Ltd
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 July 2017
Case Number
98428/2015
Procedural Posture
Exception Application / Opposed Exception to Particulars of Claim
Outcome
The defendant's first and second exceptions are dismissed; the third exception is upheld. The plaintiff is granted leave to amend his third claim within 15 days, failing which it will be dismissed. The defendant is ordered to pay two thirds of the plaintiff's costs relating to the exception.
Judges
TSS Malatji
Legal Topics
Defamation, Actio Iniuriarum, Aquilian Action, Special Damages, Pleading Requirements
Delict Civil Procedure Defamation Actio Iniuriarum Aquilian Action Special Damages Pleading Requirements

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

Parties

Mashilo Mokotong

Plaintiff

Sishen Iron Ore Company (Pty) Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Exception Application / Opposed Exception to Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether conduct, as opposed to spoken or written words, can constitute a defamatory statement for purposes of a defamation claim.
  2. 2 Whether the pleaded dismissal incident is reasonably capable of conveying the defamatory meanings alleged by the plaintiff.
  3. 3 Whether a claim for special damages (pure economic loss) is sustainable under a defamation action without pleading Aquilian liability and falsity.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that conduct, not limited to spoken or written words, can constitute a defamatory statement if it conveys an imputation that lowers the plaintiff's reputation in the eyes of others. The manner of the plaintiff's dismissal—being escorted by security and removed from the premises—was capable of being understood as implying serious misconduct, which is per se defamatory. However, the claim for special damages (loss of future income) arising from the alleged defamation was unsustainable because the plaintiff failed to plead the necessary elements of Aquilian liability, including wrongfulness and falsity, as required by law. The first and second exceptions were dismissed, while...

Court Disposition

The defendant's first and second exceptions are dismissed; the third exception is upheld. The plaintiff is granted leave to amend his third claim within 15 days, failing which it will be dismissed. The defendant is ordered to pay two thirds of the plaintiff's costs relating to the exception.

Orders

  • The defendant's first and second exceptions are dismissed.
  • The defendant's third exception is upheld.