Info Plus v Scheelke 1998 (3) SA 184 (SCA)

Info Plus v Scheelke 1998 (3) SA 184 (SCA)

Issue: Whether a person who is defamed in a newspaper article can recover damages from the newspaper's publisher, even if the person who wrote the article was not employed by the publisher.

Facts:

Info Plus was a newspaper publisher. Scheelke was a businessman.

Info Plus published an article in its newspaper that alleged that Scheelke was involved in fraudulent activities. Scheelke was not employed by Info Plus and the article was written by a freelance journalist.

Scheelke sued Info Plus for damages, alleging that Info Plus was liable for defamation. Info Plus argued that it was not liable for defamation because the article was written by a freelance journalist and not by an employee of Info Plus.

Key Facts:

• Info Plus was a newspaper publisher.
• Scheelke was a businessman.
• Info Plus published an article in its newspaper that alleged that Scheelke was involved in fraudulent activities.
• Scheelke was not employed by Info Plus and the article was written by a freelance journalist.
• Scheelke sued Info Plus for damages, alleging that Info Plus was liable for defamation.
• Info Plus argued that it was not liable for defamation because the article was written by a freelance journalist and not by an employee of Info Plus.

Court's Decision:

The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) held that Info Plus was liable for defamation. The SCA reasoned that a newspaper publisher is liable for the defamatory content of articles that it publishes, even if the articles were written by freelance journalists.

The SCA also reasoned that it would be unfair to Scheelke if Info Plus was not held liable for defamation. The SCA found that Info Plus had published the article without verifying the information contained in the article and that Info Plus had not taken any steps to correct the defamatory statements after Scheelke had complained about them.

Application of the Law to the Facts of the Case:

The SCA applied the law to the facts of the case and found that Info Plus was liable for defamation. The SCA ordered Info Plus to pay damages to Scheelke.

Conclusion:

The SCA's decision in Info Plus v Scheelke 1998 (3) SA 184 (SCA) is a significant case because it clarifies the law relating to the liability of newspaper publishers for defamation. The decision emphasizes that a newspaper publisher is liable for the defamatory content of articles that it publishes, even if the articles were written by freelance journalists.

The decision also provides guidance to newspaper publishers and their customers on their rights and obligations. Newspaper publishers should be aware that they may be liable for defamation, even if the defamatory statements are contained in articles that were written by freelance journalists. Customers of newspaper publishers should be aware that they may be able to recover damages from newspaper publishers if they are defamed in articles that are published by the newspaper publishers.