More v Khoza (2022/039544) [2024] ZAGPJHC 619 (9 July 2024)

More v Khoza (2022/039544) [2024] ZAGPJHC 619 (9 July 2024)

The court found that the amended particulars of claim were excipiable because the transcript of the television interview, when read as a whole and in the correct chronological order, did not contain statements reasonably capable of referring to the plaintiff. The plaintiff was not named, and the only reference to the CFO was in the context of a vacant position, not linked to the alleged misconduct. The identification of an executive as female did not establish the necessary connection to the plaintiff. The court held that the plaintiff's inversion of the order of statements in her pleading failed to sustain her case. The application to amend was dismissed, but the plaintiff was not...

Citation
[2024] ZAGPJHC 619
Parties
Plaintiff: Faith Matshepo More; Defendant: Reuel Jethro Khoza
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
9 July 2024
Case Number
2022/039544
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application to Amend Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Plaintiff's application to amend particulars of claim dismissed with costs.
Judges
Green
Legal Topics
Defamation, Pleading Amendment, Exception Procedure, Wrongfulness, Intention to Defame
Civil Procedure Delict Defamation Pleading Amendment Exception Procedure Wrongfulness Intention to Defame

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Faith Matshepo More

Plaintiff

Reuel Jethro Khoza

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application to Amend Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the amended particulars of claim are excipiable as failing to sustain a cause of action for defamation.
  2. 2 Whether the statements made during the television interview are reasonably capable of referring to the plaintiff.
  3. 3 Whether the statements, when read in context and chronological order, are defamatory of the plaintiff.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the amended particulars of claim were excipiable because the transcript of the television interview, when read as a whole and in the correct chronological order, did not contain statements reasonably capable of referring to the plaintiff. The plaintiff was not named, and the only reference to the CFO was in the context of a vacant position, not linked to the alleged misconduct. The identification of an executive as female did not establish the necessary connection to the plaintiff. The court held that the plaintiff's inversion of the order of statements in her pleading failed to sustain her case. The application to amend was dismissed, but the plaintiff was not...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's application to amend particulars of claim dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The Plaintiff’s application to amend her particulars of claim is dismissed with costs, such costs to include the costs of counsel on scale B.