LCR4805
ASSIGNMENT 1 SEMESTER 2 2025
UNIQUE NO.
DUE DATE: 12 AUGUST 2025
, QUESTION 1
a) Liability of Mary to a claim of defamation (10 Marks)
Defamation in South African law is the unlawful and intentional publication of a
defamatory statement concerning another person (Neethling et al., 2020). The
elements that must be proven are:
1. Publication:
o Mary posted defamatory content on John’s Facebook wall, which is a
public platform accessible to third parties.
o The post attracted numerous negative comments, satisfying the
requirement of publication to at least one other person (Burchell,
2021).
2. Defamatory Statement:
o Calling John a “thief and fraudster” harms his reputation and
professional integrity, especially since he operates an investment
company where trust and credibility are crucial.
o In Le Roux v Dey 2011 (3) SA 274 (CC), the Constitutional Court
confirmed that statements lowering a person’s reputation in the eyes of
society are defamatory.
3. Reference to the Plaintiff:
o The statement was directly about John, as he was named in the
Facebook post.
4. Wrongfulness:
o Defamation is presumed to be wrongful unless a valid defence exists
(Neethling et al., 2020).
5. Fault (Intention):
o Mary’s spite and anger indicate animus iniuriandi, fulfilling the intention
requirement.
ASSIGNMENT 1 SEMESTER 2 2025
UNIQUE NO.
DUE DATE: 12 AUGUST 2025
, QUESTION 1
a) Liability of Mary to a claim of defamation (10 Marks)
Defamation in South African law is the unlawful and intentional publication of a
defamatory statement concerning another person (Neethling et al., 2020). The
elements that must be proven are:
1. Publication:
o Mary posted defamatory content on John’s Facebook wall, which is a
public platform accessible to third parties.
o The post attracted numerous negative comments, satisfying the
requirement of publication to at least one other person (Burchell,
2021).
2. Defamatory Statement:
o Calling John a “thief and fraudster” harms his reputation and
professional integrity, especially since he operates an investment
company where trust and credibility are crucial.
o In Le Roux v Dey 2011 (3) SA 274 (CC), the Constitutional Court
confirmed that statements lowering a person’s reputation in the eyes of
society are defamatory.
3. Reference to the Plaintiff:
o The statement was directly about John, as he was named in the
Facebook post.
4. Wrongfulness:
o Defamation is presumed to be wrongful unless a valid defence exists
(Neethling et al., 2020).
5. Fault (Intention):
o Mary’s spite and anger indicate animus iniuriandi, fulfilling the intention
requirement.
