Wierzycka and Another v Manyi (30437/17) [2017] ZAGPJHC 323 (20 November 2017)

Wierzycka and Another v Manyi (30437/17) [2017] ZAGPJHC 323 (20 November 2017)

The court found that the applicants established a prima facie right to protection against further defamatory statements by the respondent, as the statements published on social media were, in the context of South African society, likely to lower the applicants' reputation and cause irreparable harm. The respondent's defences of truth and fair comment were not substantiated on the papers. The risk of ongoing harm was heightened by the respondent's public influence and the threatening responses from followers. However, the court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to grant final relief on the PEPUDA-based claims, as these fall within the purview of the Equality Court. Accordingly, the...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPJHC 323
Parties
Applicant: Magdalena Franciszka Wierzycka; Applicant: Sygnia Limited; Respondent: Mzwanele Jimmy Manyi
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
20 November 2017
Case Number
30437/17
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interim Interdict Pending Final Determination; Jurisdictional Referral
Outcome
Interim interdict granted; matter referred for final determination to a single judge sitting as both Equality Court and High Court; costs reserved.
Judges
EF Dippenaar
Legal Topics
Freedom of Expression, Defamation, Hate Speech, Harassment, Interim Interdict, Right to Dignity
Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Delict Freedom of Expression Defamation Hate Speech Harassment Interim Interdict +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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Magdalena Franciszka Wierzycka

Applicant

Sygnia Limited

Applicant

Mzwanele Jimmy Manyi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Interim Interdict Pending Final Determination; Jurisdictional Referral

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's social media statements about the applicants are defamatory under South African law.
  2. 2 Whether the statements constitute harassment and hate speech as contemplated by PEPUDA and the Constitution.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants are entitled to interim interdictory relief pending final determination.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants established a prima facie right to protection against further defamatory statements by the respondent, as the statements published on social media were, in the context of South African society, likely to lower the applicants' reputation and cause irreparable harm. The respondent's defences of truth and fair comment were not substantiated on the papers. The risk of ongoing harm was heightened by the respondent's public influence and the threatening responses from followers. However, the court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to grant final relief on the PEPUDA-based claims, as these fall within the purview of the Equality Court. Accordingly, the...

Court Disposition

Interim interdict granted; matter referred for final determination to a single judge sitting as both Equality Court and High Court; costs reserved.

Orders

  • The application is referred to a single judge sitting both as an Equality Court under PEPUDA and as a High Court.
  • Pending final determination, the respondent is directed to remove, within 24 hours, from all social media accounts under his control, the statements referred to in this application, including retweets and responses.