---

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG

 

CASE NO: 2024/150153

 

1. Reportable:  No

2. Of interest to other judges: No

3. Revised

28 January 2025

WRIGHT J

 

JL UNIQUE SOLUTIONS (PTY) LTD                                First Applicant

(Registration Number: 2022/387458/07)

 

TYRONE CHETTY                                                             Second Applicant

(Identity Number: 8[…])

 

and

 

E MEDIA INVESTMENTS (PTY) LTD                                First Respondent

 

DEVI SANKAREE-GOVENDER                                        Second Respondent

 

THE HAWKS                                                                      Third Respondent

 

THE INDEPENDENT POLICE INVESTIGATION               Fourth Respondent

 

DIRECTORATE (IPID)

AGENT 9 - ALLEGED ETHICAL HACKER                       Fifth Respondent

 

MRVW - ALLEGED ETHICAL HACKER                           Sixth Respondent

 

GOOGLE SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD                              Seventh Respondent

 

GOOGLE INCORPORATED                                              Eighth Respondent

 

YOUTUBE LLC                                                                   Ninth Respondent

 

THE BROADCASTING COMPLAINTS                              Tenth Respondent

COMMISSION OF SOUTH AFRICA (BCCSA)

 

JUDGMENT

 

WRIGHT J

 

1.  The 1^st applicant company and the 2^nd applicant man who is the moving force behind the first applicant seek urgently, in effect,  an order that the 1^st and 2^nd respondents, EMedia and the Ms Sankaree -Govender remove certain allegations from all their social platforms. Related relief is sought.

 

2.  The applicants say that they are defamed in the programme. They say that they assist persons who have been defrauded by scamming. They say that the programme aired defames them as it accuses them of being the scammers themselves.

 

3.  The programme was first aired as long ago as 27 October 2024. The present application was served on 30 December 2024.

 

4.  On 7 January 2025, the attorney for 1st and 2nd respondents wrote to the applicants’ attorney inviting the latter to withdraw the application as “ the horse had bolted” and that the applicants’ had waited over two months before launching the application.

 

5.  On 8 January 2025, the applicants’ attorney had replied saying that the matter was urgent.

 

6.  On 14 January 2025, the attorney for the 1^st and 2^nd applicants sent a fresh invitation to the applicants’ attorney along similar lines to the letter of 7 January 2025.

 

7.  In my view, any urgency is self created.

 

8.  Costs are sought on a punitive scale by some of the respondents and personally against the applicants’ attorney by 1^st and 2^nd respondents.

 

ORDER

1.  Struck off.

2.  Costs reserved. -

 

GC Wright

Judge of the High Court

Gauteng Division, Johannesburg

 

HEARD                   : 28 January 2025 

DELIVERED           : 28 January 2025

APPEARANCES     : 

Applicant               Adv MD John

                              083 457 7112

                              advkohn@gmail.com  

Instructed by         Judy Wilkins Attorneys

                              082 555 2283

                              judy@wilkinsattorneys.co.za  

 

1^st & 2^nd Respondents

                              Adv B Winks

                              ben@benwinks.com

 

Instructed by         Rosengarten & Feinberg – Daniel Baschkin

                              011 486 0242

                              danielb@rf-law.co.za

Tenth Respondent

                              Adv J Schoeman

                              082 336 4089

                              juan@rsabar.com

Instructed by         Barnard Attorneys – A Lotter

                               083 324 9340

                              anneke@barnardinc.co.za

---