Richards v Kuranda [1914] ZAWLD 15 (12 June 1914)

Defamation.-Slander.-ln R.M. Court.-By attorney.-Extent of Counsel's privilege .

An advocate is protected where he makes a defamatory statement in court in the interests of his client, pertinent to the issue, even though it be false, provided he has some reasonable cause for his conduct. Preston v. Luyt (1911 E.D.C. 298) 'followed.
In a case known as the London case, heard in the High Court in 1912, in which plaintiff gave evidence, the Court said he was an unsatisfactory witness,
ready to make unsupported assertions when his interest was in question, and not incapable of making an untrue statement. In a case heard in the R.M. Court in 1914 between the C Co. and one Carlis, in
which plaintiff was the Co's principal witness, the magistrate remarked whilst Carlis was under cross-examination, that one of the parties must be commjt,ting perjury. Defendant, who was Carlis's attorney, thereupon interposed and, with the London case in his mind, used words to the effect that the
Full Bench of Judges in England had stated that plaintiff was guilty of perjury and that he (defendant) could prove it. He repeated this statement in court later. Neither of the allegations were made during plaintiff's crossexamination nor during defendant's address, and neither were true. It was found that the words complained of were uttered solely in the interest of defendant's client, but recklessly or without real belief in their truth, and without instructions from his client. Held, that though there was some cause for the first allegation, the repetition was such an excess of the rights of advocacy as to make defendant liable. £50
awarded.