2nd Appeal Decision -Jurie Roux vs News24


Thu, Oct 6, 2022

BEFORE THE APPEALS PANEL OF THE PRESS COUNCIL OF SOUTH AFRICA

In the matter between:

Jurie Roux                                                                                                                  Applicant

and

News24                                                                                                                  Respondent

Matter No: 9507

           SECOND DECISION ON AN APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL

  1. This is an application by Mr Jurie Roux (applicant) for leave to appeal the Ruling of the Deputy Press Ombud dated 28 August 2022. The Ruling refused the condonation of the late filing by the applicant of his complaint against News24 (respondent) in respect of what the latter had published of the applicant on 14 March 2022 with the headline “Has Jurie Roux captured SA Rugby?” I do not intend to go into details about this matter, which is now appearing before me for the second time, after I had remitted it to the Press Ombud.
  2. The issue before me is a narrow one: whether the applicant has reasonable prospects that the Appeals Panel will condone his late filing of the complaint. His explanation has always been, and remains, that he was involved in review proceedings before the court, reviewing arbitration proceedings about the same subject matter. It has now become a tired topic. Neither the Public Advocate nor the Press Ombud found any adequate explanation why the applicant did not file his complaint while at the same time pursuing the review application before court. Both of them have given full reasons why there is no adequate explanation for his delay.  In its application for leave, the applicant has added nothing of substance that is new. I need not repeat the reasons given by the Public Advocate and the Press Ombud, except to add the following:

2.1 The underlying consideration for the resolution of disputes in terms of the Press Code, is to ensure that complaints are dealt with expeditiously. If time frames are not adhered to without any adequate explanations the purpose would be defeated.

2.2 The Press Ombud has made a finding that the prospects on the merits are not good.

      3. In the circumstances, the following Order is made:

  • The application is dismissed.

Dated this 3rd day of October 2022

Judge B M Ngoepe, Chair, Appeals Panel