South Africa Case Law

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

Mercuria Energy Trading SA (Pty) Ltd and Another v Omang Trading and Logistics (Pty) Ltd and Others (15724/2021)

Mercuria Energy Trading SA (Pty) Ltd and Another v Omang Trading and Logistics (Pty) Ltd and Others (15724/2021) [2023] ZAGPJHC 577 (26 May 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

15724/2021

Judge

T P Mudau

High Court order compelling further discovery under Rule 35(3) in a commercial dispute over VAT refunds and alleged privilege claims.

• Discovery Of Documents
• Uniform Rules Of Court Rule 35
• Relevance Of Evidence
• Privilege In Discovery
• Discovery-of-documents
• Uniform-rules-rule-35

White Oak Trade & Speciality Finance Cayman LLC v Santam Structured Insurance and Others (13311/2020)

White Oak Trade & Speciality Finance Cayman LLC v Santam Structured Insurance and Others (13311/2020) [2023] ZAGPJHC 284 (30 March 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

13311/2020

Judge

Adams

The court found that, regarding the plaintiff's application to compel further and better discovery, there are reasonable prospects that another court may reach a different conclusion, warranting leave to appeal. The issues raised by the defendants concerning privilege, relevance, and the scope of the order justify appellate consideration. However, as to the defendants' own application to compel, the plaintiff's responses were deemed adequate, and no reasonable prospect of success exists for an appeal on that aspect. The court also determined that the interlocutory nature of the order does not…

Source excerpt

• Discovery Procedure
• Leave To Appeal
• Interlocutory Orders
• Privilege
• Costs Orders

Barnard Patel Attorneys and Another v Chester (16255/2018)

Barnard Patel Attorneys and Another v Chester (16255/2018) [2022] ZAGPPHC 163 (3 March 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

16255/2018

Judge

Mbongwe

High Court application to compel further particulars dismissed; the court held the requested details were unnecessary or privileged, and costs followed the result.

• Request For Further Particulars
• Privilege
• Negligence
• Prescription
• Mandate Of Attorney
• Civil-procedure

Coetzee v Janse van Rensburg (31884/2018)

Coetzee v Janse van Rensburg (31884/2018) [2020] ZAGPPHC 457 (19 August 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

31884/2018

Judge

M Kumalo

The High Court dismissed an attorney's defamation claim, finding the defendant's complaint-related statements were not defamatory and were protected by privilege.

• Defamation
• Privilege
• Fair Comment
• Costs Award
• Fair-comment
• Costs

Coetzee v Janse van Rensburg (31884/2018)

Coetzee v Janse van Rensburg (31884/2018) [2020] ZAGPPHC 451 (19 August 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

31884/2018

Judge

M Kumalo

The High Court dismissed an attorney’s defamation claim against a litigant, finding her statements were not defamatory in context and were protected by privilege.

• Defamation
• Privilege
• Malice
• Attorney And Client Costs
• Qualified-privilege
• Civil-procedure

Fisher and Others v Contribsystems Vertriebs GmbH; Contribsystems Vertriebs GmbH v Amadwala Trading 51 CC and Others (AR644/2016)

Fisher and Others v Contribsystems Vertriebs GmbH; Contribsystems Vertriebs GmbH v Amadwala Trading 51 CC and Others (AR644/2016) [2017] ZAKZPHC 49 (17 November 2017)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

AR644/2016

Judges

Madondo, Masipa, Van Zÿl

High Court appeal in a discovery dispute held that unredacted documents and a 2013 licensing agreement were relevant and had to be disclosed.

• Discovery Of Documents
• Confidential Information
• Privilege
• Interlocutory Orders
• Appealability
• Unfair Competition

Katz v Welz and Another (22440/2014)

Katz v Welz and Another (22440/2014) [2017] ZAWCHC 135 (7 November 2017)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

22440/2014

Judge

Davis

The court held that discovery in defamation actions is governed by a broad test of relevance, sourced in the issues raised on the pleadings. While the defendants are not required to set out all sources relied upon for the published articles, their defence of fair comment and reasonable publication makes the record of the plaintiff's liquidation and sequestration applications relevant. The request for discovery is not a fishing expedition, provided it is limited to the period prior to publication (July 2012 to July 2014). Statements of account are discoverable, but the plaintiff may redact pri…

Source excerpt

• Defamation
• Discovery
• Privilege
• Reasonable Publication
• Fair Comment
• Fee Notes

Portion 292, Waterval Developments (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service and Another (26092/2016)

Portion 292, Waterval Developments (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service and Another (26092/2016) [2017] ZAGPPHC 629 (2 October 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

26092/2016

Judge

G Rautenbach

High Court interlocutory ruling on Rule 35(12) discovery in a tax dispute, ordering disclosure of one memorandum but refusing production of other requested documents.

• Discovery Under Rule 35
• Privilege
• Tax Court Appeal Documents
• Rule-35-12-discovery
• Legal-privilege
• Tax-litigation

Morgan Beef (Pty) Limited v Mkhulu Electro Distribution Projects (Pty) Limited and Another (60027/2015)

Morgan Beef (Pty) Limited v Mkhulu Electro Distribution Projects (Pty) Limited and Another (60027/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 507 (18 August 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

60027/2015

Judge

G Rautenbach

The High Court ordered further discovery under Rule 35(3), rejecting objections based on possession, relevance and privilege, and awarded costs to the applicant.

• Discovery Of Documents
• Rule 35 Application
• Privilege
• Relevance Of Evidence
• Civil-procedure
• Discovery-of-documents