CASE NUMBER: 15/2017 – KARSON VS MULTICHOICE- CHANNEL 405 – ANN7 – COMMENT

Complaint against comments made by an ANN7 analyst concerning Mr Pravin Gordhan, who was referred to as a sour former Finance Minister who was mobilizing support against Mr Gigaba.  Tribunal held that the personal opinions of the analyst were linked to facts as genuinely perceived by him and that they were not broadcast as absolute [...]

By | 2017-06-18T12:36:47+00:00 June 18th, 2017|Multichoice|Comments Off on CASE NUMBER: 15/2017 – KARSON VS MULTICHOICE- CHANNEL 405 – ANN7 – COMMENT

CASE NUMBER: 14/2017 – MOREMI VS MULTICHOICE CHANNEL 405 – ANN7 – DIGNITY

The Complainant lodged a grievance after his image was erroneously shown by the Respondent during a live interview with ANC Youth League (ANCYL) spokesperson, Matome Moremi on the 27th of April 2017. Matome Moremi has the same name as the Complainant which is the apparent reason for the error. The Complainant feels that the use [...]

By | 2017-06-18T12:31:11+00:00 June 18th, 2017|Multichoice|Comments Off on CASE NUMBER: 14/2017 – MOREMI VS MULTICHOICE CHANNEL 405 – ANN7 – DIGNITY

CASE NUMBER: 14/2016 -GLEBELANDS HOSTEL COMMUNITY VIOLENCE VICTIMS (SOUTH DURBAN KZN) VS MULTICHOICE CHANNEL 404 – DISCLOSED IDENTITIES

A complaint was received that the Broadcaster ignored a request by the Complainants not to disclose the identities of victims of violence in the Glebelands community when reporting on a press conference. Through miscommunication between staff of the Broadcaster the request was ignored.  After reminding the Broadcaster of the request the Broadcaster again failed to [...]

By | 2017-01-27T11:46:28+00:00 September 21st, 2016|Multichoice|Comments Off on CASE NUMBER: 14/2016 -GLEBELANDS HOSTEL COMMUNITY VIOLENCE VICTIMS (SOUTH DURBAN KZN) VS MULTICHOICE CHANNEL 404 – DISCLOSED IDENTITIES

CASE NO: 25/2014 – Ex Parte MULTICHOICE (KykNet) In Re Reinhardt’s Place and Pretorius v Multichoice (KykNet) CASE NUMBER 15/2014(BCCSA)

Application for condonation of late filing of application for leave to appeal. Complainant  entitled to certainty as to judgment of BCCSA. Strict compliance required, except where special circumstances are shown. Misunderstanding  of the Rules not in itself a ground for condonation. Justice in favour of protection of minority. [2014] JOL 32187 (BCCSA) CLICK TO VIEW [...]

By | 2017-01-27T11:46:33+00:00 December 20th, 2015|Multichoice|Comments Off on CASE NO: 25/2014 – Ex Parte MULTICHOICE (KykNet) In Re Reinhardt’s Place and Pretorius v Multichoice (KykNet) CASE NUMBER 15/2014(BCCSA)

CASE NO: 31/2014 – MAREE VS MULTICHOICE- KYKNET – DEROGATORY LANGUAGE

A film, that was broadcast by the Respondent on its Channel 144 (KYKNET), made in 1970, included racially derogatory words. A complaint was lodged in regard to the words.  The Tribunal held that the words were integral to the drama and did not amount to hate speech. In fact, the words were necessary to demonstrate [...]

By | 2017-01-27T11:46:34+00:00 December 20th, 2015|Multichoice|Comments Off on CASE NO: 31/2014 – MAREE VS MULTICHOICE- KYKNET – DEROGATORY LANGUAGE

CASE NO: 35/2014 – Ex Parte MULTICHOICE (KykNet) – In Re Reinhardt’s Place and Pretorius v Multichoice (KykNet) case number 15/2014(BCCSA)

Application for condonation of late filing of application for leave to appeal.  Ex Parte Multichoice (KykNet). CLICK TO VIEW FULL JUDGMENT

By | 2015-12-18T19:50:10+00:00 December 18th, 2015|Multichoice|Comments Off on CASE NO: 35/2014 – Ex Parte MULTICHOICE (KykNet) – In Re Reinhardt’s Place and Pretorius v Multichoice (KykNet) case number 15/2014(BCCSA)

CASE NO: 39/2014 – MULTICHOICE CHANNEL 161 VS MPHUTHI – APPEAL – WATERSHED

The appeal was upheld on the grounds that Multichoice did not violate any of the clauses cited in the previous BCCSA adjudication decision because a parent advisory was provided and properly flighted with appropriate age restriction for the sexual innuendos and the lyrics of the offending closing song. [2014] JOL 32622 (BCCSA) CLICK TO VIEW [...]

By | 2017-01-27T11:46:36+00:00 December 18th, 2015|Multichoice|Comments Off on CASE NO: 39/2014 – MULTICHOICE CHANNEL 161 VS MPHUTHI – APPEAL – WATERSHED