Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Manqele v Baloyi Masango Inc Attorneys and Others (896/2023) [2025] ZAMPMBHC 75 (12 August 2025)
The High Court dismissed a defamation claim over an investigative municipal report, finding qualified privilege, no unlawful publication, and no proof of malice.
Sibiya v Morgan-Mashale (6342/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 232 (8 August 2025)
High Court defamation case over social media posts alleging crime-scene tampering and bribery; the court found plausible defences and discharged the rule nisi.
Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa v Masenya (2024-123072) [2025] ZAGPPHC 782 (1 August 2025)
The court found that the plaintiff's amended particulars of claim contain sufficient allegations to establish publication, as specific individuals and groups were identified as recipients of the defamatory statements. The allegations, when read contextually, accuse the plaintiff of fraud and other serious misconduct, which are capable of defamatory meaning and are prima facie wrongful. The court held that Uniform Rule 18 does not apply since the cause of action is defamation, not contract. Furthermore, intent to defame is presumed in law once publication of defamatory matter is established. A…
Source excerpt
Municipal Employees Pension Fund and Others v Ndou and Another (2025/076955) [2025] ZAGPJHC 762 (29 July 2025)
The High Court granted an urgent interim interdict stopping alleged defamatory statements about the MEPF, its administrator, and trustees pending action proceedings.
Mantashe v Zuma (2025/094050) [2025] ZAGPJHC 697 (16 July 2025)
The court found that the respondent's statements on TikTok and other social media platforms, alleging that the applicant received R40 million from ERP Mine intended for former mineworkers, were objectively defamatory. The respondent failed to provide credible evidence to substantiate his claims and did not report the matter to the police. The defence of truth and public benefit was unavailing, as the respondent relied on hearsay and unsupported affidavits. The statements imputed dishonesty and lack of integrity to the applicant, a government minister, and were widely disseminated, causing ong…
Source excerpt
Van Stryp v Healy (A2024/029832) [2025] ZAGPJHC 675 (15 July 2025)
The majority held that none of the seven Facebook posts published by the respondent constituted defamation or actionable insult against the appellant. Posts 1 to 6, though discourteous and rude, were made in the context of a robust online debate and would not be understood by a reasonable person as lowering the appellant's reputation or dignity. The references to 'stupid people', 'stupidity', and 'B problem' were not proven to refer to the appellant in a defamatory manner, and the phrase 'B problem' was reasonably interpreted as 'big problem'. The seventh post, which could have been defamator…
Source excerpt
Muziwenkosi v Minister of Police (18474/2012) [2025] ZAGPJHC 672 (10 July 2025)
The High Court awarded R650,000 for unlawful arrest and detention after finding SAPS lacked objectively reasonable grounds and acted humiliatingly.
Mbiza and Another v Timati (2023/053714) [2025] ZAGPJHC 651 (27 June 2025)
The court found that the respondent made four Facebook posts after the interim interdict of 21 June 2023, at least two of which were defamatory and injurious to the applicants. The respondent's denials were bald, unsubstantiated, and failed to create bona fide factual disputes. The respondent did not provide any valid defence such as truth, fair comment, or privilege, nor did he discharge the evidential burden to cast reasonable doubt on willfulness and mala fide conduct. The court held that the respondent's conduct was in flagrant disregard of the court order and amounted to contempt beyond…
Source excerpt
Jukes v Malekjee (2024/091632) [2025] ZAGPJHC 642 (26 June 2025)
Default judgment for defamation and malicious prosecution was granted after a false police complaint led to the plaintiff’s arrest, detention, and humiliation.
Jacobs v Minister of Police and Others (2021/6576) [2025] ZAGPJHC 722 (12 June 2025)
The High Court held that a warrantless arrest and 26-hour detention were unlawful after video evidence contradicted the officers’ version. Defamation claim dismissed.
Explore more
