,LCR4805 Assign No 2
(University of South Africa)
, MODULE NAME: LCR4805 UNIQUE NO. ASSIGNMENT NO: 02
755427
STUDENT NO. 3048-584-3
Question 1
a. Mr X is to write a letter to West-World Internet Ltd informing them of his request for the
internet service provider to remove the defamatory messages about him from their bulletin.
If the service provider refuses or fails to remove the defamatory messages, Mr X is to
approach his attorney to serve West-world with a letter of demand to remove the
defamatory statements.
If the internet service provider still doesn’t comply, the attorney may approach the court
for a urgent application for an interdict order that will compel the internet service
provider to remove the defamatory messages. After being granted the interdict, Mr X will
have to prove that there was an act, being the publication of words, an injury to
personality by the words and lastly there must be a connection between the act and the
injury that Mr X suffered. A person may institute an action for defamation only if such a
person can prove that the defamatory allegation refers to such a person.
Any person who intentionally and without authority to do so, interferes with data in a
way which causes infringement on someone privacy is committing an offence or
anyone who performs electronic actions that interferes with plaintiff email massages is
committing an offence. Whether there is a causal link between the act and the injury to
personality must be tested objectively, in the opinion of the reasonable person. Section
86(1) of the of the ECT Act criminalizes any unauthorized “access to interception of, or
interference with data”, thus interception or interference with the actions of unlawful
access and modification with the SALC had thought to prohibit in connection with data.
Section 86(2) specifically prohibits any unlawful access of information. Causal link and
mens rea could be proved in this set of facts, and also the form of dolus eventualis and
dolus generalis. If West World Internet Ltd fails to remove the defamatory massages
from the internet, the affected person may file a lawsuit to a court of law. X can apply for
an order in the form of mandamus or interdict, to force West World Internet Ltd to
remove or stop publishing the defamatory massages from its site or seek an order
requiring the respondent to remove the defamatory matter within an hour of publication.
X may approach the court;
(University of South Africa)
, MODULE NAME: LCR4805 UNIQUE NO. ASSIGNMENT NO: 02
755427
STUDENT NO. 3048-584-3
Question 1
a. Mr X is to write a letter to West-World Internet Ltd informing them of his request for the
internet service provider to remove the defamatory messages about him from their bulletin.
If the service provider refuses or fails to remove the defamatory messages, Mr X is to
approach his attorney to serve West-world with a letter of demand to remove the
defamatory statements.
If the internet service provider still doesn’t comply, the attorney may approach the court
for a urgent application for an interdict order that will compel the internet service
provider to remove the defamatory messages. After being granted the interdict, Mr X will
have to prove that there was an act, being the publication of words, an injury to
personality by the words and lastly there must be a connection between the act and the
injury that Mr X suffered. A person may institute an action for defamation only if such a
person can prove that the defamatory allegation refers to such a person.
Any person who intentionally and without authority to do so, interferes with data in a
way which causes infringement on someone privacy is committing an offence or
anyone who performs electronic actions that interferes with plaintiff email massages is
committing an offence. Whether there is a causal link between the act and the injury to
personality must be tested objectively, in the opinion of the reasonable person. Section
86(1) of the of the ECT Act criminalizes any unauthorized “access to interception of, or
interference with data”, thus interception or interference with the actions of unlawful
access and modification with the SALC had thought to prohibit in connection with data.
Section 86(2) specifically prohibits any unlawful access of information. Causal link and
mens rea could be proved in this set of facts, and also the form of dolus eventualis and
dolus generalis. If West World Internet Ltd fails to remove the defamatory massages
from the internet, the affected person may file a lawsuit to a court of law. X can apply for
an order in the form of mandamus or interdict, to force West World Internet Ltd to
remove or stop publishing the defamatory massages from its site or seek an order
requiring the respondent to remove the defamatory matter within an hour of publication.
X may approach the court;
