Mulaudzi v Motsepe (40978/19) [2025] ZAGPJHC 389 (22 April 2025)

Mulaudzi v Motsepe (40978/19) [2025] ZAGPJHC 389 (22 April 2025)

The court found that the plaintiff's particulars of claim did not seek patrimonial damages but only sentimental damages for injury to dignity. Therefore, documents relating to her income and wealth were irrelevant and not discoverable. The request for phone records was also dismissed as overbroad and irrelevant, since the pleadings did not allege dissemination of the defamatory remarks beyond the meeting. The court held that none of the documents sought were in the plaintiff's possession or relevant to the issues, and thus the application to compel discovery failed.

Citation
[2025] ZAGPJHC 389
Parties
Plaintiff: Mamodupi Mohlala Mulaudzi; Defendant: Tumisho Motsepe
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 April 2025
Case Number
40978/19
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure Application / Application to Compel Discovery
Outcome
Application to compel discovery dismissed; each party to pay their own costs.
Judges
S D J Wilson
Legal Topics
Discovery, Defamation, Pleadings, Damages Quantification
Civil Procedure Discovery Defamation Pleadings Damages Quantification

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mamodupi Mohlala Mulaudzi

Plaintiff

Tumisho Motsepe

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Procedure Application / Application to Compel Discovery

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the documents listed in the defendant's discovery schedule are discoverable by the plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff's particulars of claim justify discovery of documents relating to her income, wealth, and communications.
  3. 3 Whether the defendant's request for records relating to the plaintiff's phone usage is relevant to the pleaded issues.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff's particulars of claim did not seek patrimonial damages but only sentimental damages for injury to dignity. Therefore, documents relating to her income and wealth were irrelevant and not discoverable. The request for phone records was also dismissed as overbroad and irrelevant, since the pleadings did not allege dissemination of the defamatory remarks beyond the meeting. The court held that none of the documents sought were in the plaintiff's possession or relevant to the issues, and thus the application to compel discovery failed.

Court Disposition

Application to compel discovery dismissed; each party to pay their own costs.

Orders

  • The application to compel discovery is dismissed.
  • Each party is to pay their own costs.