Nomngcongo v Mathibeli and Another (CIV/T 352 of 2010) [2011] LSHC 107 (24 February 2011)

IN THE HIGH COUR T OF LE S OTHO In t h e m a t t er b et ween : CIV/ T/ 3 5 2 / 2 0 1 0 MR J US TICE THAMS ANQA NOMONGCONGO P LAINTIF F An d R E V. MALE KA ALP HONS E MATHIBE LI MAZE NOD P INTING WOR KS 1 S T DE F E NDANT 2 ND DE F E NDANT J UDGME NT De live r e d by t h e Ho n o u r a ble Ac t in g J u d ge L. A. Mo le t e On t h e 2 4 t h F e br u a r y 2 0 1 1 Th e Pla in tiff in th is m a tter , a J u d ge of th e High Cou r t of Les oth o, in s titu ted a n a ction a ga in s t th e two Defen d a n ts for d a m a ges in th e a m ou n t of M1 ,5 0 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 (on e a n d h a lf m illion Ma loti) for d efa m a tion . Th e cla im a r is es ou t of two a r ticles wh ich a p p ea red in th e “Moelets i oa Ba s oth o” n ews p a p er of th e 1 0 t h Ma y 2 0 0 9 . Th e two d efen d a n ts a re th e ed itor a n d p u b lis h in g com p a n y of th e n ews p a p er a n d p la in tiff a s s erts th a t th ey in ten tion a lly p u b lis h ed th e a r ticles with th e ob ject of im p a ir in g h is r igh t to d ign ity a n d fa ir n a m e. Th e m a tter wa s d efen d ed b y a n otice filed b y E . H. Ph oofolo a ttor n eys a n d th ey fu r th er requ es ted fu r th er p a r ticu la r s on 5 t h J u ly 2 0 1 0 . After th e p a r ticu la r s were s u p p lied , n o p lea wa s filed . On th e 7 th Decem b er 2 0 1 0 a n otice to file p lea wa s s erved u p on th e s a id a ttor n eys , b u t n o p lea wa s filed . Th e m a tter th erefore ca m e b efore m e a s a n a p p lica tion for d efa u lt ju d gm en t. I a r r a n ged a d a te of h ea r in g on th e 3 r d J a n u a ry 2 0 1 0 , with Mr . Na th a n e for th e p la in tiff a n d ra is ed with h im m y in itia l con cer n s a b ou t gr a n tin g th e ju d gm en t in d efa u lt. Th ey rela ted to p roced u ra l a n d s u b s ta n tive lega l a s p ects of th e cla im . Th e p roced u r a l a s p ects were th e d is crep a n cy b etween th e s u m m on s a n d d ecla r a tion a s well a s s er vice of th e n eces s a ry p r oces s u p on th e d efen d a n t’s a ttor n ey. I s ou gh t to con fir m th a t th e d efen d a n ts were a wa re th a t th e m a tter wa s p r oceed in g in d efa u lt of th e p lea . Mr . Na th a n e im m ed ia tely with d rew th e cla im for in teres t in th e s u m m on s , wh ich wa s in con flict with th e d ecla r a tion in th a t n o cla im for in teres t wa s in clu d ed in th e la tter . He in d ica ted th a t th e fu r th er p a r ticu la r s were s erved u p on th e a ttor n ey a s well a s th e n otice to file p lea a n d th ere wa s a ccor d in gly n o d ou b t th a t th ey h a d d efa u lted . Fu r th erm ore, a n otice of s et d own for th e h ea rin g wa s a ls o s erved for th a t d a y. I d ecid ed th a t a fu r th er d a te b e a lloca ted for th e h ea r in g of th e m a tter a n d th a t cou n s el b e rea d y to a d d res s th e m ore s u b s ta n tia l a n d lega l a s p ects of th e ca s e wh ich were th e followin g: a ) Th e tim e la p s e b etween th e p u b lica tion of th e a lleged d efa m a tion a n d th e com m en cem en t of th e a ction . Th e p er iod in b etween wa s on e yea r . I s ou gh t a n exp la n a tion th ereof. b ) Th e rea s on a b len es s a n d ju s tifica tion of th e qu a n tu m of th e cla im . Th e ca s e wa s th en a lloca ted for h ea r in g on th e 1 7 th Feb r u a ry 2 0 1 1 ; a n d I m a d e th e fu r th er or d er th a t E . H. Ph oofolo a ttor n eys b e s erved with a n otice of s et d own for th a t d a te. On th e 1 7 t h Feb ru a ry 2 0 1 1 th e m a tter p r oceed ed . Th ere wa s n o a p p ea r a n ce for th e d efen d a n ts . Mr . Na th a n e h a d filed h ea d s of a rgu m en t to a d d res s th e cou r t on th e is s u es to b e con s id ered b y th e cou r t. E . H. Ph oofolo a ttor n eys ou gh t to h a ve a p p ea red on th a t d a y; or filed a n otice of with d r a wa l a s a ttor n eys of record . Th is wa s n ot d on e. I n eed to m a k e th e p oin t th a t it is th e ob liga tion of cou n s el or a ttor n ey a s officer s of th e cou r t to ta k e th e n eces s a ry s tep s to in for m th e cou r t or file a with d r a wa l n otice in ca s es wh ere th ey n o lon ger a ct for a n y litiga n t. Th e cou r t is oth er wis e b e ju s tified to in fer th a t t h e fa ilu re to ta k e th e fu r th er s tep s in th e p r oceed in gs is rem is s n es s on th e p a r t of th e p r a ctition er s con cer n ed . Th e m a tter p r oceed ed on th e a lloca ted d a te a n d I con s id ered th e fa cts a n d la w a p p lica b le a s well a s th e s u b m is s ion s b y Mr . Na th a n e. I wa s n ot s a tis fied th a t th e d ela y h a d b een exp la in ed s u fficien tly; b u t Mr . Na th a n e’s a r gu m e n t wa s th a t it m a y red u ce th e qu a n tu m of th e d a m a ges , b u t will n ot tota lly exon er a te th e d efen d a n ts . Th e fa cts of th e ca s e ca n b e b r iefly ou tlin ed a s follows : In th e n ews p a p er ed ition of th e 1 0 th Ma y 2 0 0 9 th e p u b lica tion con ta in ed two a r ticles wh ich referred to th e cou r t of Les oth o a s th e ca u s e a n d a gen t of con flict or d is p u tes a m on gs t th e p u b lic r a th er th a n a n in s titu tion to res olve th e m . Th e fir s t a r ticle in p a r ticu la r , m a d e fa r rea ch in g b la ta n t a n d s weep in g s ta tem en ts a b ou t th is b ein g a res u lt of th e cor r u p tion th a t is r ife in th e High Cou r t. Th e followin g s ta tem en t wa s m a d e a b ou t th e ju d ges ; “to m y ob s er va tion , th es e p eop le a ccep t b r ib ery with th ieves a n d cr im in a l ……….. in d eed , th ere is a lot of b r ib ery in cou r t s a n d it b lin d fold s p eop le ………….th ere is n o cor r u p tion th a t s u r p a s s es th a t of m a k in g a b ra a i a t th e h om e of a p oliticia n a n d th a t of ju d ges receivin g veh icles in th e a m ou n t of M4 ,0 0 0 .0 0 .” No m en tion wa s m a d e of p la in tiff in h is fir s t a r ticle, b u t th e wr iter (u n d er a p s en d on ym ) wen t on to s a y th a t to ju s tify h is p oin t h e wou ld r efer to two ca s es m en tion ed in th e a r ticle. On e of th es e ca s es wa s p res cr ib ed over b y th e p la in tiff. Th e s econ d a r ticle wa s m ore d irect a n d s p ecifica lly refer red to th e ca s e of th e Les oth o E va n gelica l Ch u r ch wh ich th e p la in tiff p res cr ib ed over . It con ta in ed th e followin g s ta tem en t a b ou t th e ju d ge: “Th ey s a y th is on e wh o b elon gs to th e Xh os a ’s ju s t m u d d led u p th e ca s e a n d h a d it d is m is s ed even b efore a n h ou r h a d la p s ed .” Th e s ta tem en t, in th e Ses oth o la n gu a ge, a s it wa s d is res p ect fu l a n d a r r oga n t , a n d con d es cen d in g. Alth ou gh ju d ge’s n a m e wa s n ot m en tion ed ; I d o n ot h es ita te to a ccep t th a t referen ce wa s to n on e oth er th a n p la in tiff; a n d wou ld b e u n d ers tood a s s u ch b y th e rea d er . Th e p la in tiff a ver s in th e a ffid a vit filed in s u p p or t of th e d efa u lt ju d gm en t th a t th e im p or t of th e m ea n in g of th e a r ticles is th a t b eca u s e of h is cor r u p t n a tu re, h e fa iled to a p p ly h is m in d ju d icia lly to th e m a tter . He fu r th er s ta tes th a t 1 s t d efen d a n t wa s ch a r ged with cr im in a l con tem p t a s a r es u lt of th e a r ticles , a n d even tu a lly con victed b y CULLINAN AJ u n d er CR I/ T/ 9 0 / 2 0 0 9 on 1 7 t h Decem b er 2 0 0 9 . Th e d ecis ion wa s n ever a p p ea led . A clea r a n d con cis e d efin ition of d efa m a tion b y th e m ed ia is con ta in ed in th e b ook P E R S ONALITY R IGHT AND F R E E DOMS (1 9 9 8 ) by J . M. BUR CHE LL wh ere h e d efin es it a s th e u n la wfu l (u n rea s on a b le) n egligen t p u b lica tion of d efa m a tory m a tter refer r in g to th e p la in tiff wh ich ca u s es h is or h er rep u ta tion to b e d a m a ged . I a m s a tis fied th a t p la in tiff h a s p r oved h is ca s e a ga in s t d efen d a n ts a n d is en titled to a ju d gm en t a ga in s t d efen d a n ts on th e b a s is of th eir d efa m a tor y s ta tem en ts a ga in s t h im . On th e a s p ect of qu a n tu m , I con s id ered th e d ela y in b r in gin g th e a ction to b e a fa ctor to b e ta k en in to a ccou n t. I h a ve a ls o con s id ered a u th orities on th e m a tter a n d s p ecifica lly a ck n owled ge th a t th e n a tu re of th e d efa m a tion ; th e wor d s com p la in ed of; th e in d ign ity to wh ich p la in tiff wa s s u b jected to or s u ffered a n d h is s ta tu s h a ve to b e a ll ta k en in to a ccou n t. Aga in s t th is b a ck gr ou n d a n d in th e con text of th is tr ia l, Mr . Na th a n e s u b m itted th a t it is th e d u ty of th e cou r t to m a k e a r u lin g on th e a p p rop r ia te qu a n tu m of d a m a ges . Th is is en tirely in th e d is crection of th e cou r t. He qu oted th e ca s e of S KINNE R v S HE P IR O 1 9 2 4 WLD 1 5 7 a t 1 6 7 . Wh ere it wa s h eld th a t th e lega l p os ition is th a t th e a m ou n t of d a m a ges is en tirely in th e d is cretion of th e cou r t. S u ch d is cretion h owever to b e exer cis ed on rea s on a b le a n d n ot a r b itr a r y p r in cip les . I a gr ee . Th is is tr ite a n d h a s b een con s is ten tly a p p lied to d a te. Th e cou r t is requ ired to con s id er a ll th e releva n t fa ctor s ; b u t m os t im p or ta n tly t o s tr ik e a b a la n ce b etween th e r igh t to d ign ity a n d th e righ t to freed om of exp res s ion in a ca s e s u ch a s th is . Th es e fa ctor s to b e ta k en in to a ccou n t in rega r d to b oth th e m er its a n d th e qu a n tu m of d a m a ges to b e a wa r d ed . Mr . Na th a n e a greed with m e th a t th e cou r t will h a ve to con s id er a ls o t h e s ocia l a n d econ om ic con d ition s of th e cou n tr y. In m y view, a good d efa m a tion a ction m a y b e tr ivia lized or ren d ered r id icu lou s b y a n in fla ted a n d exces s ive a m ou n t cla im ed in d a m a ges . Th is m a y ju s tify a p u n itive ord er a ga in s t p la in tiff in cer ta in cir cu m s ta n ces . Th e a u th or ities a gree th a t th e cou r ts h a ve to p rotect freed om of exp res s ion b y gr a n tin g th e m ed ia a cer ta in la titu d e in in s ta n ces wh ere p u b lic a ffa ir s a re con cer n ed . Th e ch illin g effect b r ou gh t a b ou t b y a d efa m a tion a ction m u s t b e lim ited a s fa r a s p os s ib le. NATIONAL ME DIA LIMITE D vs BOGOS HI 1 9 9 8 (4 ) S A 1 1 9 6 . In a n y d em ocr a cy, freed om of exp res s ion is rega rd ed a s fu n d a m en ta l b eca u s e it fa cilita tes op en d is cu s s ion a n d d eb a te. It in clu d es th e r igh t to h ea r , for m a n d exp res s op in ion s a n d views on a wid e r a n ge of m a tter s ; th u s m a k in g it p os s ib le for s ociety to s ea r ch for th e tr u th . S A NATIONAL DE F E NCE UNION v MINIS TE R OF DE F E NCE 1 9 9 9 (4 ) S A 4 6 9 HOLOMIS A v AR GUS NE WP AP E R LTD 1 9 9 6 (2 ) S A 5 8 8 MOAF R IKA NE WS P AP E R R E : R ULE NIS I (R v MOKHANT Š O AND OTHE R S ) 2 0 0 3 BCLR 5 3 4 I h a ve refer red to th e followin g ca s es to gu id e m e in a r r ivin g a t a fa ir d ecis ion on qu a n tu m . 1 . MOE KE TS I S E LLO vs CANDI R ATABANE R AMINOANE AND ANOTHE R CIV/ T/ 1 9 / 9 7 (u n rep or ted . Mr. J u s tice Leh oh la (a s h e th en wa s ) a wa r d ed a n a m ou n t of M9 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 d a m a ges for d efa m a tion a n d M1 5 ,0 0 0 .0 0 p u n itive d a m a ges . 2 . ANTHONY CLOVIS MANYE LI v VINCE NT MAKHE LE AND ANOTHE R C o f A (Civ) No 1 0 o f 1 9 8 3 wh ere a s u m of M8 ,0 0 0 .0 0 wa s a wa r d ed a n d Leh oh la J (a s h e th en wa s ) s a id in Sello (s u p r a ) th a t it wa s “a fa ir ly h u ge a m ou n t b y th os e d a ys s ta n d a r d s .” I a gree. A s im p le illu s tr a tion is th a t of a m otor veh icle wh ich a t th a t tim e cou ld b e b ou gh t for s u ch a m ou n t b u t wou ld tod a y b e wor th m ore th a n M1 0 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 (on e h u n d red th ou s a n d m a loti). 3 . In DU P LE S S IS J UANITA vs J . T. P UBLISHING (E DMS ) BP K AND ANOTHE R High Co u r t o f S o u t h Afr ic a TP O c a s e No 7 5 7 / 2 0 0 5 , a n a wa r d of R8 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 p lu s in teres t a n d cos ts of two cou n s el wa s a wa r d ed to p la in tiff. 4 . DR `MAKOALI MAKOTOKO vs DR NYAMAKYE GYS I AGYE I CIV/ T/ 1 6 7 / 2 0 0 6 , b efore h er La d ys h ip Ma d a m J u s tice M. Hla joa n e, a wa r d ed a m ou n t of M1 0 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 (on e h u n d red th ou s a n d ) wa s m a d e to a d octor wh o a lleged th a t th e wor d s com p la in ed of were u n d er s tood to m ea n th a t s h e wa s “u n p a tr iotic, d is cr im in a tor y, cor r u p t, d is h on es t a n d im m or a l”. I a m a wa re of th e fa ct th a t th e p a r ties in th a t ca s e a r r ived a t th e s u m b y n egotia tin g a s ettlem en t th a t wa s m a d e a n or d er of cou r t. Th e s ign ifica n ce of it h owever is th a t p la in tiff’s in itia l cla im of h a lf a m illion m a loti, wa s u p on fu r th er reflection a n d n egotia tion b y th e p a r t ies ’ cou n s el red u ced to M1 0 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 . In th is ca s e I h a ve ta k en in to a ccou n t th e d ela y a s a lrea d y m en tion ed , th e wor d s com p la in ed of; a n d th e fa ct th a t th e d efa m a tion wa s n ot s olely a n d d irectly a im ed a t th e p la in tiff; b u t wa s r a th er a wh oles a le s wip e a t th e ju d icia r y wh ere referen ce wa s m a d e to p la in tiff in p a r ticu la r . I m a k e th e followin g ord er : J u d gm en t is gr a n ted in fa vou r of th e p la in tiff a ga in s t b oth d efen d a n ts join tly a n d s ever a lly in th e a m ou n t of on e h u n d red a n d eigh ty th ou s a n d m a lot i (M1 8 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 ) with cos ts in th e m a tter . ______________ L. A. MOLE TE ACTING J UDGE For Pla in tiff For Defen d a n t : : Mr . Na th a n e No Ap p ea ra n ce (E. H. Ph oofolo – Attor n eys of r ecord ) 10