Vermeulen and Others v Minister van Veiligheid en Sekuriteit en Anders (1377/2008) [2011] ZANWHC 85 (10 March 2011)

Vermeulen and Others v Minister van Veiligheid en Sekuriteit en Anders (1377/2008) [2011] ZANWHC 85 (10 March 2011)

The court held that the defendants are bound by the grounds stated in their notice of exception and cannot rely on grounds not specified therein. The notice of exception failed to set out the specific averments necessary to sustain a cause of action for defamation or injuria, such as publication and defamatory matter. As a result, the plaintiffs would be prejudiced if the court adjudicated on grounds not raised in the notice. The exception was therefore dismissed, and the court did not pronounce on grounds raised only in oral argument. The court reiterated the elements required for a defamation claim and advised the plaintiffs to consider these in their pleadings.

Citation
[2011] ZANWHC 85
Parties
Plaintiff: Jan Arnold Vermeulen; Plaintiff: Petrus Johannes Maas; Plaintiff: Salomon Jurgens Bezuidenhout; Plaintiff: Lionel Dyson; Plaintiff: Joshua Francois Rosslee; Plaintiff: Cornelius Johannes Rudolph; Defendant: Minister van Veiligheid en Sekuriteit; Defendant: Die Nasionale Kommissaris van Polisie; Defendant: Die Noordwes Provinsiale Kommissaris van die Suid Afrikaanse Polisiediens; Defendant: Direkteur Patrick Assaneng; Defendant: Superintendent Duba
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 March 2011
Case Number
1377/2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Judgment / Exception to Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Exception dismissed with costs.
Judges
N Gutta
Legal Topics
Exception Procedure, Defamation, Iniuria, Unfair Dismissal, Jurisdiction, Pleading Requirements
Civil Procedure Labour Law Delict Exception Procedure Defamation Iniuria Unfair Dismissal Jurisdiction +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jan Arnold Vermeulen

Plaintiff

Petrus Johannes Maas

Plaintiff

Salomon Jurgens Bezuidenhout

Plaintiff

Lionel Dyson

Plaintiff

Joshua Francois Rosslee

Plaintiff

Cornelius Johannes Rudolph

Plaintiff

Minister van Veiligheid en Sekuriteit

Defendant

Die Nasionale Kommissaris van Polisie

Defendant

Die Noordwes Provinsiale Kommissaris van die Suid Afrikaanse Polisiediens

Defendant

Direkteur Patrick Assaneng

Defendant

Superintendent Duba

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Judgment / Exception to Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the particulars of claim disclose a cause of action for defamation or injuria.
  2. 2 Whether the exception raised by the defendants is sustainable given the grounds stated in the notice of exception.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiffs have pleaded the necessary elements of defamation, including publication and defamatory matter.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the defendants are bound by the grounds stated in their notice of exception and cannot rely on grounds not specified therein. The notice of exception failed to set out the specific averments necessary to sustain a cause of action for defamation or injuria, such as publication and defamatory matter. As a result, the plaintiffs would be prejudiced if the court adjudicated on grounds not raised in the notice. The exception was therefore dismissed, and the court did not pronounce on grounds raised only in oral argument. The court reiterated the elements required for a defamation claim and advised the plaintiffs to consider these in their pleadings.

Court Disposition

Exception dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The exception is dismissed with costs.