LPL4802 ASSIGNMENT 1 SEMESTER 1 FOR 2023-
LAW OF DAMAGES. 90% AND ABOVE. DISTINCTION
GUARANTEED. QUALITY WORK WITH FOOTNOTES
AND BIBLIOGRAPHY.
QUESTION 1
Study the case of Economic Freedom Fighters and others v Manuel 2021 (3) SA
425 (SCA) and answer the question below:
In para [92], the court exclaimed [sic], “An unliquidated claim for damages must
be pursued by institution of an action.” However, contrary to this accepted
practice, the attorneys for the respondent brought the claim of damages for
defamation in an application proceeding. Discuss fully, the reasons the court
puts forward in support of accepted practice, that general damages for
defamation must be instituted in an action proceeding. Refer to relevant case law
and legislation in your answer. [25 marks]
The Supreme Court of Appeal affirmed a High Court decision that a political party had
defamed a former politician by labeling him "corrupt and nepotistic" and referring to the
procedure over which he presided as "secretive." After his political party posted a
statement on Twitter, the former politician filed a suit with the High Court, claiming that
the statement was false and hurtful to his reputation. The Supreme Court emphasized
that the defense of reasonable publication, which had previously only been available to
defendants in the media, was now available to nonmedia defendants as well, despite its
conclusion that the political party had no defense to the publication of the statement.
On March 27, 2019, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) of South Africa released a
statement through their official Twitter account. The statement accused former South
African Finance Minister Trevor Manuel of nepotism, corruption, and covert behavior in
the selection of the South African Revenue Service Commissioner (SARS). Manuel
recused himself from interviewing one of the applicants, Edward Kieswetter, since
Kieswetter had previously worked at SARS during Manuel's tenure as Finance Minister.
Kieswetter was subsequently selected as the favored choice by the panel and became
LAW OF DAMAGES. 90% AND ABOVE. DISTINCTION
GUARANTEED. QUALITY WORK WITH FOOTNOTES
AND BIBLIOGRAPHY.
QUESTION 1
Study the case of Economic Freedom Fighters and others v Manuel 2021 (3) SA
425 (SCA) and answer the question below:
In para [92], the court exclaimed [sic], “An unliquidated claim for damages must
be pursued by institution of an action.” However, contrary to this accepted
practice, the attorneys for the respondent brought the claim of damages for
defamation in an application proceeding. Discuss fully, the reasons the court
puts forward in support of accepted practice, that general damages for
defamation must be instituted in an action proceeding. Refer to relevant case law
and legislation in your answer. [25 marks]
The Supreme Court of Appeal affirmed a High Court decision that a political party had
defamed a former politician by labeling him "corrupt and nepotistic" and referring to the
procedure over which he presided as "secretive." After his political party posted a
statement on Twitter, the former politician filed a suit with the High Court, claiming that
the statement was false and hurtful to his reputation. The Supreme Court emphasized
that the defense of reasonable publication, which had previously only been available to
defendants in the media, was now available to nonmedia defendants as well, despite its
conclusion that the political party had no defense to the publication of the statement.
On March 27, 2019, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) of South Africa released a
statement through their official Twitter account. The statement accused former South
African Finance Minister Trevor Manuel of nepotism, corruption, and covert behavior in
the selection of the South African Revenue Service Commissioner (SARS). Manuel
recused himself from interviewing one of the applicants, Edward Kieswetter, since
Kieswetter had previously worked at SARS during Manuel's tenure as Finance Minister.
Kieswetter was subsequently selected as the favored choice by the panel and became
