South Africa Case Law

Van Stryp v Healy (A2024/029832)

Van Stryp v Healy (A2024/029832) [2025] ZAGPJHC 675 (15 July 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A2024/029832

Judges

Wilson, Du Plessis, Meaden

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

• Defamation
• Iniuria
• Social Media Liability
• Fair Comment
• Objective Reasonable Person Test

Liberty Group Limited v Chonco and Another (7449/24P)

Liberty Group Limited v Chonco and Another (7449/24P) [2025] ZAKZPHC 42 (25 April 2025)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

7449/24P

Judge

Mathenjwa

The High Court interdicted former Liberty affiliates from posting defamatory claims online, finding the allegations unproven and not fair comment.

• Defamation
• Final Interdict
• Fair Comment
• Truth And Public Benefit
• Unlawful Publication
• Freedom Of Expression

Mkhwane v Dyakala (14102/2020)

Mkhwane v Dyakala (14102/2020) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1024 (14 October 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

14102/2020

Judge

S D J Wilson

The High Court refused leave to appeal in a defamation case, finding no clear error in its factual findings, its public-interest analysis, or its treatment of fair comment.

• Defamation
• Truth As Defence
• Public Interest
• Fair Comment
• Prejudice
• Factual Findings On Appeal

Mkhwane v Dyakala (14102/2020)

Mkhwane v Dyakala (14102/2020) [2024] ZAGPJHC 638 (15 July 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

14102/2020

Judge

S D J Wilson

Defamation claim over WhatsApp messages dismissed: the court held the corruption allegations were substantially true and other remarks were fair comment.

• Defamation
• Fair Comment
• Truth And Public Interest
• Burden Of Proof
• Municipal Corruption
• Fair-comment

Du Toit v Becket and Another (8687/2023)

Du Toit v Becket and Another (8687/2023) [2024] ZAWCHC 56 (21 February 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

8687/2023

Judge

Holderness AJ

The court found that the statements published by the respondents in the Circular were defamatory of the applicant, damaging his reputation by suggesting misconduct, threats, and involvement in corruption. The respondents failed to discharge the onus of proving the truth of the statements or that their publication was for the public benefit or amounted to fair comment. The communications relied upon by the respondents did not substantiate the alleged threats or misconduct. The applicant established a clear right to protection of his reputation, a reasonable apprehension of future injury, and t…

Source excerpt

• Defamation
• Final Interdict
• Fair Comment
• Truth And Public Benefit
• Qualified Privilege

Le Grellier and Another v Kamionsky and Another (2023-058876)

Le Grellier and Another v Kamionsky and Another (2023-058876) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1286 (13 November 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023-058876

Judge

S D J Wilson

The High Court set aside an ex parte interim interdict restraining alleged defamation, holding that the applicants had not excluded possible defences or shown irreparable harm.

• Defamation
• Freedom Of Expression
• Prior Restraint
• Ex Parte Interdict
• Fair Comment
• Public Interest Defence

Raphala v Baloyi (2021/29113)

Raphala v Baloyi (2021/29113) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1184 (17 October 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2021/29113

Judge

Wright

The court found that the respondent's statements, both those previously litigated and the newer ones, were objectively defamatory and not protected by any recognised defence. The respondent failed to prove truth, public interest, or fair comment, and did not establish privilege or reasonable publication. The statements went far beyond legitimate criticism and robust public debate, amounting to crude and baseless invective. The respondent's reliance on freedom of speech under section 16 of the Constitution was rejected, as such protection does not extend to defamatory statements lacking factua…

Source excerpt

• Defamation
• Freedom Of Expression
• Fair Comment
• Public Interest
• Privilege
• Damages

Quandomanzi Investments (Pty) Ltd t/a SM Structures v Govender and Others (2023/43063)

Quandomanzi Investments (Pty) Ltd t/a SM Structures v Govender and Others (2023/43063) [2023] ZAGPJHC 516 (19 May 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/43063

Judge

S D J Wilson

High Court dismissed an urgent application to stop a TV broadcast said to be defamatory about a construction company, finding no clear right or reasonable apprehension of harm.

• Defamation
• Prior Restraint
• Fair Comment
• Urgent Interdict
• Broadcast Media
• Public Interest

Mabuza v Letwaba (5068/2021)

Mabuza v Letwaba (5068/2021) [2023] ZAMPMBHC 24 (12 April 2023)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

5068/2021

Judge

Mashile

The High Court held that defamatory allegations made about David Mabuza on television were unproven and ordered an interdict, apology, and costs.

• Defamation
• Interdict
• Public Apology
• Commissioning Of Affidavit
• Jurisdiction
• Fair Comment

Becker v Brits (14156/2019)

Becker v Brits (14156/2019) [2022] ZAWCHC 44; [2022] HIPR 199 (WCC) (23 March 2022)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

14156/2019

Judge

Wille

High Court defamation trial over two letters alleging alcohol abuse; plaintiff awarded R350,000, interest, and attorney-and-client costs.

• Defamation
• Animus Iniuriandi
• Damages Quantification
• Qualified Privilege
• Fair Comment
• Damages-quantification