Voges v Vicente (A103/09) [2010] ZAFSHC 28 (4 March 2010)

Voges v Vicente (A103/09) [2010] ZAFSHC 28 (4 March 2010)

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to establish a prima facie case of defamation. The evidence of the appellant’s witnesses was vague, contradictory, and unreliable. Mr. van Vuuren’s testimony was inconsistent with the particulars of claim and lacked clarity regarding the context and content of the alleged defamatory statements. Mr. Vicente’s evidence was incoherent and undermined by his mental impairment. The court found that the quality of the evidence did not meet the low threshold required to survive absolution from the instance. The discrepancies between the pleadings and the evidence were material and could not be overlooked. The court a quo was entitled to make...

Citation
[2010] ZAFSHC 28
Parties
Appellant: P C Voges; Respondent: T J Vicente
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 March 2010
Case Number
A103/09
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Order of Absolution From the Instance Granted by the Sasolburg Magistrate’s Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
M.B. Molemela, M.H. Rampai
Legal Topics
Defamation, Absolution From the Instance, Prima Facie Case, Credibility of Witnesses
Delict Defamation Absolution From the Instance Prima Facie Case Credibility of Witnesses

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P C Voges

Appellant

T J Vicente

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Order of Absolution From the Instance Granted by the Sasolburg Magistrate’s Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant established a prima facie case of defamation against the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the evidence presented by the appellant was sufficient to survive absolution from the instance.
  3. 3 Whether the discrepancies between the particulars of claim and the evidence were material.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to establish a prima facie case of defamation. The evidence of the appellant’s witnesses was vague, contradictory, and unreliable. Mr. van Vuuren’s testimony was inconsistent with the particulars of claim and lacked clarity regarding the context and content of the alleged defamatory statements. Mr. Vicente’s evidence was incoherent and undermined by his mental impairment. The court found that the quality of the evidence did not meet the low threshold required to survive absolution from the instance. The discrepancies between the pleadings and the evidence were material and could not be overlooked. The court a quo was entitled to make...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.