Media 24 (Pty) Ltd v Nhleko and Another

Media 24 published a front-page article in City Press in November 2016 alleging that then Minister of Police, Mr Nkosinathi Nhleko, had been implicated in approving payments exceeding R30 million to a non-profit organisation run by his partner, Dr Nomcebo Mthembu. Mr Nhleko and Dr Mthembu instituted defamation proceedings claiming R15 million each. Media 24 admitted publication but denied the defamatory meaning and pleaded alternative defences of truth in the public interest, protected comment, and reasonable publication. The respondents objected to the plea as a bare and evasive denial and opposed Media 24’s proposed amendment to amplify its plea. The Western Cape High Court refused leave to amend on the basis that Media 24 had failed to justify the allegations in the article. Media 24 appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld. The High Court’s order was set aside and replaced with an order granting Media 24 leave to amend its plea within ten days. The respondents were ordered to pay the costs of the amendment application on an attorney-and-client scale. No costs order was made in respect of the appeal.

The case reaffirms core principles of South African civil procedure concerning pleadings and amendments, particularly in defamation actions involving the media. It clarifies that courts must not impose their own views of the dispute or require defendants to plead evidence or justify unpleaded allegations. The judgment also cautions against judicial overreach into debates about media ethics at the pleading stage and reinforces the liberal approach to amendments.