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.
Body Corporate of Sunnyside Gardens v Perreira (A234/22) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1960 (28 November 2023)
High Court appeal in a defamation claim upheld R50,000 damages for a letter accusing a unit owner of misuse of electricity and nuisance.
Adams v Makhoye (2974/2019) [2023] ZANWHC 142 (17 August 2023)
Default judgment in a defamation action arising from an email accusing a SAPS major general of infidelity. The court awarded R230,000 in damages and costs.
K.A.B v National Union of Metal Workers of South Africa (NUMSA) and Others (1438/2021) [2023] ZAFSHC 288; [2023] 10 BLLR 1098 (FB); (2023) 44 ILJ 2554 (FSB) (21 July 2023)
The High Court held that disclosing an employee’s HIV status in a workplace grievance meeting was wrongful defamation and an invasion of privacy, awarding R100,000 in damages.
Cullen v Jonas and Another (3027/2021) [2023] ZAECQBHC 30 (17 May 2023)
The High Court held that an ethics complaint letter to a university professor was defamatory, published by reasonable expectation, and not protected by qualified privilege.
Maliza v G4S Cash Solutions (Pty) Ltd (4086/2019) [2023] ZAECMHC 5; [2023] 4 BLLR 377 (ECM) (2 February 2023)
The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that the second defendant made the alleged defamatory statement. The plaintiff's evidence was inconsistent and not supported by his own witnesses. The documentary evidence and the testimony of the defendants indicated that concerns about the plaintiff's possible involvement in robberies were communicated as part of an investigation, not as a direct accusation or defamatory statement. The plaintiff did not discharge the onus of proof required in civil matters, and the probabilities favoured the defendants' versi…
Source excerpt
de Villiers v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Another (57558/2014) [2021] ZAGPPHC 443 (2 July 2021)
The High Court dismissed a defamation claim arising from a courtroom dispute, finding the plaintiff failed to prove that the second defendant accused him of theft.
Jacobs Safaris CC v Bloodlions NPC and Others (7187/2019P) [2020] ZAKZPHC 31 (30 July 2020)
The court found that the applicant failed to identify, in its founding affidavit, the specific scenes or narrative in the documentary that allegedly defamed it, which is a fatal defect. Even considering the content identified in reply and argument, the documentary does not expressly or impliedly state that the applicant is involved in canned lion hunting or the lion bone trade. The reasonable viewer, in context, would not necessarily draw the inference that the applicant participates in such activities, especially given the explanations provided by the applicant's staff in the film. Furthermo…
Source excerpt
Moepi v Ratlhangane (33251/2017) [2019] ZAGPPHC 493 (19 September 2019)
The High Court dismissed an application for absolution and held the defendant liable for defamation after sending a letter accusing the plaintiff of misconduct and theft.
Suid-Afrikaanse Onderwysunie v Pashut (28706/2018) [2019] ZAGPPHC 408 (30 August 2019)
The High Court dismissed exceptions to a defamation pleading, holding the amended particulars of claim sufficiently disclosed a cause of action.
Explore more
