In the case of Economic Freedom Fighters and Others v Manuel, the South African Supreme Court of Appeal considered several defences to defamation that had been raised by the defendants. The case involved statements made by members of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) political party about a businessman named Trevor Manuel. The EFF members had accused Manuel of corruption and bribery, and Manuel had subsequently brought a defamation claim against them.
Fair comment defence
One of the defences raised by the EFF members was that the statements were protected under the defence of fair comment. This defence applies when the statements are based on facts that are true, and the comment is made in good faith and is an honest expression of the commentator’s opinion. In this case, the court found that the statements made by the EFF members were not fair comment, as they were not based on true facts, and were made with the intention of damaging Manuel’s reputation.
Qualified privilege defence
Another defence raised was the defence of qualified privilege. This defence applies when the statement is made in the context of a legal, moral or social duty, or interest. The court found that the statements made by the EFF members did not fall within the scope of qualified privilege, as they did not have a legal, moral or social duty to make the statements.
Fair report defence
Additionally, the defence of fair report on a matter of public interest was also raised. This defence applies when the statement is a fair and accurate report of proceedings of a public nature, such as a parliamentary debate. The court found that the statements made by the EFF members were not a fair and accurate report of proceedings of a public nature, and therefore, this defence was not applicable.
Innocent dissemination defence
Lastly, the defence of innocent dissemination was also raised, this defence applies when a person did not know and had no reason to suspect that the statement was defamatory. The court found that the defendants had knowledge of the defamatory nature of their statements and therefore, the defence of innocent dissemination did not apply.
The Supreme Court of Appeal upheld the defamation claim
In conclusion, the South African Supreme Court of Appeal found that the defences raised by the EFF members in the case of Economic Freedom Fighters and Others v Manuel were not applicable. As a result, the court upheld Manuel’s defamation claim against the EFF members. The court found that the statements made by the EFF members were not protected under the defences of fair comment, qualified privilege, fair report on a matter of public interest and innocent dissemination.
Speak to a Litigation and Dispute Resolution expert
Our Litigation and Dispute Resolution team has broad knowledge and experience handling defamation claims and related legal matters. We are proficient at cost-effective dispute resolution without compromising on the desired result.
For Defamation related queries contact
Basilio de Sousa basil@abgross.co.za
Henno Bothma henno@abgross.co.za
Wesley Scheepers wesley@abgross.co.za
Disclaimer
The articles on these web pages are provided for general information purposes only. Whilst care has been taken to ensure accuracy, the content provided is not intended to stand alone as legal advice. Always consult a suitably qualified attorney on any specific legal problem or matter.