Isparta v Richter and Another (22452/12)
Isparta v Richter and Another (22452/12) [2013] ZAGPPHC 243; 2013 (6) SA 529 (GNP) (4 September 2013)
The court found that both Facebook postings were defamatory of the plaintiff. The first posting, though not serious defamation, was gratuitous and intended to place the plaintiff in a bad light. The second posting was scandalous, suggesting the plaintiff tolerated sexual deviation, which compounded the damage to her reputation. The postings, taken together and in context, were clearly understood by the relevant audience to refer to the plaintiff, even if not always named. The second defendant, though not the author, was tagged and allowed his name to be coupled with the first defendant, makin…
Source excerpt
- Defamation
- Social Media Liability
- Publication
- Identification Of Plaintiff
- Damages For Defamation