Tsedu and Others v Lekota and Another (715/07) [2009] ZASCA 11; 2009 (4) SA 372 (SCA) ; [2009] 3 All SA 46 (SCA) (17 March 2009)

Tsedu and Others v Lekota and Another (715/07) [2009] ZASCA 11; 2009 (4) SA 372 (SCA) ; [2009] 3 All SA 46 (SCA) (17 March 2009)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the article published by the appellants was defamatory of the respondents. The repetition rule applies: a publisher who repeats defamatory statements made by another is liable as if they originated the statement. The article falsely imputed that the respondents, both high-ranking ANC officials, breached confidences by supplying confidential party information to an apartheid-era agent. The ordinary reader would understand this as a serious breach of trust, lowering the respondents in public estimation. No valid defence was advanced by the appellants, and the subsequent retraction and apology did not mitigate the harm, as it came only on the eve of...

Citation
[2009] ZASCA 11
Parties
Appellant: Mathatha Tsedu; Appellant: Wonder Hlongwa; Appellant: Media 24 (Pty) Limited; Respondent: Gerald Patrick Mosiuoa Lekota; Respondent: Joel Sibusiso Ndebele
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 March 2009
Case Number
715/07
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court, Johannesburg
Outcome
Appeal partially upheld; damages reduced to R100,000 for each respondent; appeal otherwise dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Judges
Harms, Mthiyane, Nugent, Van Heerden, Leach
Legal Topics
Defamation, Quantification of Damages, Repetition Rule, Media Liability
Delict Defamation Quantification of Damages Repetition Rule Media Liability

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mathatha Tsedu

Appellant

Wonder Hlongwa

Appellant

Media 24 (Pty) Limited

Appellant

Gerald Patrick Mosiuoa Lekota

Respondent

Joel Sibusiso Ndebele

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court, Johannesburg

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the newspaper article published by the appellants was defamatory of the respondents.
  2. 2 Whether the repetition of defamatory statements originating from another source constitutes a defence for the publisher.
  3. 3 What quantum of damages is appropriate for the harm caused by the publication.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the article published by the appellants was defamatory of the respondents. The repetition rule applies: a publisher who repeats defamatory statements made by another is liable as if they originated the statement. The article falsely imputed that the respondents, both high-ranking ANC officials, breached confidences by supplying confidential party information to an apartheid-era agent. The ordinary reader would understand this as a serious breach of trust, lowering the respondents in public estimation. No valid defence was advanced by the appellants, and the subsequent retraction and apology did not mitigate the harm, as it came only on the eve of...

Court Disposition

Appeal partially upheld; damages reduced to R100,000 for each respondent; appeal otherwise dismissed with costs, including costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The amounts awarded to Lekota and Ndebele are substituted with R100,000 each.
  • The appeal is otherwise dismissed with costs, including the costs occasioned by the employment of two counsel.