Court denies Two Oceans Marathon chairperson's bid to silence blogger
Image: Ryan Wilkisky/BackpagePix
The Gauteng High Court has dismissed an urgent application from Antoinette Cavanagh, chairperson of Cape Town's well-known Two Oceans Marathon, in her bid to silence a runner and blogger who has raised concerns about various "irregularities" and 'problems' associated with races like the Two Oceans Marathon.
Cavanagh turned to the Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg, as she claimed that Stuart Mann - the author of a blog known as The Running Mann - has made defamatory statements on his blog.
He shares information about road running events and what he calls 'exposé articles'. He has apparently brought public attention to a number of irregularities and problems that arose in races including the Two Oceans and the Comrades Marathon. Cavanagh approached the court for relief stemming from four posts which Mann published on social media.
These include an article that appeared in December last year in which he queries whether Cavanagh is an appropriate person to chair the board of the Two Oceans. He set out apparent inconsistencies between her professional and running credentials as set out in a press release announcing her election on the one hand, and those details of her credentials which Mann was able to verify on the other hand.
In April this year he dealt with certain controversies that emerged during the 2025 iteration of the Two Oceans, including a shortage of bronze medals, which Mann contends was due to Two Oceans accepting more entries than it had a permit for.
He also insinuated that she has the board completely under her thumb, as well as publishing her CV which served before the board when she was elected chair. Cavanagh, in claiming the publications are defamatory and unlawful, wanted Mann to remove them and publish an apology. She also wanted an order preventing future publication of similar content.
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Next
Stay
Close ✕
Mann disputed the urgency of the application and denied that the content of the posts is defamatory or otherwise unlawful.
Judge Seena Yacoob commented that the 'chaotic' and 'vague' manner in which the application is pleaded does not commend itself to determination on an urgent basis, but she agreed to hear it on an urgent basis. She said both Cavanagh and the Two Oceans Marathon (cited as the second applicant) fail to set out a clear factual background.
In addition, the judge said, the applicant's papers contain neither the dates of the publications, nor the specific statements or utterances complained of. Cavanagh, however, said that she considers each publication defamatory in its entirety.
Judge Yacoob further noted that the publications consist of much material which is either not obviously defamatory, or not defamatory at all.
'Neither of the applicants have made out a case that the esteem in which they are held is of a particular type. Cavanagh does not favour the court with her own full history nor does she demonstrate that she is viewed with any particular esteem or that she has a reputation for integrity and good leadership.'
The judge added that the Two Oceans does not contend that it has run its events in a manner reasonably beyond criticism and above board. It does not even contend, let alone attempt to demonstrate that it has conducted its events lawfully and in a manner compliant with its permits from the City of Cape Town.
'There is no attempt to demonstrate that any of the factual claims made in the publications is untrue, although there is a bald allegation that they are all false,' Judge Yacoob said in turning down the application.
Cape Argus
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
TimesLIVE
a day ago
- TimesLIVE
Five things to know about deputy chief justice Dunstan Mlambo
President Cyril Ramaphosa has appointed Dunstan Mlambo as deputy chief justice with effect from Friday. At 65, Mlambo brings nearly three decades of judicial experience and a lifetime of legal activism to his new role. Here are five things to know about the new deputy chief justice. 1. A legal career grounded in public interest and transformation Before joining the bench in 1997, Mlambo worked as a public interest and trade union lawyer, beginning as a legal assistant in the KaNgwane government. He later joined the Legal Resources Centre in 1987 before making a rare transition into corporate law, becoming an associate partner at Bowman Gilfillan in 1993. In 1995, he cofounded Mlambo & Modise Attorneys. His rise to the judiciary began with an appointment to the labour court and he later served in the Gauteng High Court (2000), Supreme Court of Appeal (2005) and as judge president of the labour court (2010) before assuming leadership of the Gauteng division of the high court in 2012. 2. Leading South Africa's busiest court division As judge president of the Gauteng High Court covering both Johannesburg and Pretoria Mlambo oversaw the country's most complex and demanding judicial workload. He led the division with innovation and foresight, introducing initiatives like the re-establishment of the commercial court in 2018 and mandatory civil mediation in 2025 to address case backlogs. His tenure also saw the creation of two new stand-alone high courts in Limpopo and Mpumalanga, an expansion of access to justice that many see as one of his most impactful legacies. 3. Key judgments that shaped jurisprudence Mlambo is more than an administrator — he's an influential jurist who has authored several landmark decisions: President of the Republic v Public Protector: Held former president Jacob Zuma personally liable for legal costs related to the 'State Capture' report. MultiChoice v NPA (Oscar Pistorius case): Allowed for the broadcasting of the high-profile trial. SAPS v Solidarity obo Barnard: Upheld affirmative action as a justifiable measure to address past discrimination — later affirmed by the Constitutional Court. These judgments reflect Mlambo's commitment to transparency, equality and the transformative spirit of the constitution. 4. A vision for transformative and accessible justice In his recent Judicial Service Commission (JSC) interview, Mlambo outlined a progressive vision rooted in the belief that South Africa's constitution must be a tool for economic justice. 'I think we adopted what is called a progressive constitution that seeks to uplift the blight of people,' he said, advocating for 'carefully crafted litigation' to dismantle bottlenecks that keep South Africans trapped in poverty. He also criticised Rule 46A, which allows banks to repossess homes, arguing that 'as a judiciary, we need to find a way of reforming these legal rules that form part of this conservative legal culture'. Mlambo is also a proponent of legal reform through technology and training, calling for a mediation act and suggesting the adoption of AI-driven legal tools as used in Brazil to boost efficiency. 5. Ethical leadership and accountability Mlambo has served on numerous local and international legal boards, including the Centre for the Advancement of Community Advice Offices (CAOSA), the International Legal Foundation and Africa Legal Aid. His ethical compass was evident when he revoked the appointment of an acting judge over sexual harassment complaints and supported chief justice Mandisa Maya's proposed sexual harassment policy. As he steps into this new chapter, all eyes will be on how he continues to reshape the country's legal landscape from one of the highest seats of judicial power.
IOL News
a day ago
- IOL News
Gauteng High Court strikes down City of Tshwane's R194 monthly cleansing levy as 'daylight robbery'
City of Tshwane Mayor Nasiphi Moya. Tshwane's controversial cleansing levy has been declared unlawful by the Gauteng High Court, bringing relief to nearly 260,000 ratepayers who were billed without receiving city waste services. Image: Oupa Mokoena/Independent Media A controversial monthly levy of R194.37 (excluding VAT) introduced by the City of Tshwane has been declared 'unlawful' by the Gauteng High Court, following a legal challenge by lobby group AfriForum. The fee, which targeted nearly 260,000 households and businesses that use private waste collection services, was included in the city's latest budget passed in May. The metro sought to raise more than R500 million in new revenue through the tariff. In its application, AfriForum argued that the city unfairly taxed residents who had made their own waste disposal arrangements due to Tshwane's alleged service delivery failures. The civil rights organisation said the levy amounts to unfair double taxation, particularly in cases where residents do not benefit from the metro's refuse removal services and are forced to make use of private service providers. In a judgment handed down on Thursday, Acting Judge Justice Avvakoumides declared the cleansing levy unlawful, invalid, and of no force and effect. The court also ordered the city to stop billing residents and to reimburse those who have already paid. 'The imposition of the cleansing levy by the first to fourth respondent (the City) is hereby declared unlawful, invalid, and is of no force and effect and is accordingly set aside,' the ruling read. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ Avvakoumides also instructed the city to immediately take all reasonable measures to ensure that residents and businesses are no longer billed for the cleansing levy. Where bills have already been issued, the city must credit affected accounts during the next billing cycle. Meanwhile, AfriForum welcomed the ruling. 'This ruling is an important victory in the interests of residents and businesses who have been unfairly affected by the implementation of this levy,' said Deidré Steffens, AfriForum's advisor for local government affairs. 'It is a clear confirmation of what AfriForum has been saying about this levy from the outset - that the Tshwane Metro's introduction of this levy is illegal and arbitrary.' The opposition party in Tshwane, the Democratic Alliance (DA) also supported the court's decision. The DA's Tshwane spokesperson for finance, Jacqui Uys, said the ruling was a 'victory for all citizens of Tshwane.' 'Tshwane imposed this new levy on all properties that are using private waste contractors to remove their waste,' Uys said. 'This means properties where there was no service being rendered by the city were being charged extra. Charging a fee for rendering no services, on people who receive private services, is daylight robbery.' The DA called on the city to urgently revise its budget to account for the now-unfunded revenue and avoid disruptions in service delivery. In addition, as part of the judgment, the City of Tshwane was also ordered to pay AfriForum's legal costs on a scale between attorney and client, including those of a senior counsel. IOL Politics
IOL News
5 days ago
- IOL News
Mbeki and Mabandla argue for intervention in R167 million apartheid damages case
Advocates Ngwako Maenetje and Matthew Chaskalson during legal arguments in the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, on Monday. Image: Zelda Venter Former president Thabo Mbeki and former Justice minister Brigitte Mabandla, in their application to intervene in the R167 million in constitutional damages litigation by families of victims of apartheid-era atrocities, argued that it is in the interests of justice that they be allowed to do so. The pair turned to the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, on Monday, during which their counsel, Advocate Ngwako Maenetje SC, argued that it does not matter whether the damages case by the victims and families is not aimed at them. The outcome will still have an impact on them. Maenetje told Judge Anthony Millar that the court, which ultimately has to decide on the damages issue, will have to make factual findings, which could negatively impact the reputations of Mbeki and Mabandla. He said they need to put their version of events before the court, else the court will only have parts of the facts, which it will accept as the truth as there will be nothing before it to counter it. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ The court was told that their intervention is vital to protect their reputations. Mbeki and Mabandla claimed that their rights may be violated by the court's finding that they were involved in suppressing the investigation and prosecution of Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) cases. According to Mbeki and Mabandla, they are seeking to intervene because the relief sought by the families and the consequent claim for constitutional damages is founded on serious allegations of unconstitutional, unlawful, and criminal conduct by them during their respective tenures. Mbeki and Mabandla told the court they do not seek to intervene merely to set the record straight or out of concern that the court's findings may affect their reputations. 'Rather, we seek leave to intervene because the relief sought by the Calata applicants is expressly predicated on allegations of unlawful conduct purportedly committed by us (and other state officials) during our tenure; allegations which we intend to dispute,' they explained. Maenetje said they should be allowed to defend themselves, to which Judge Millar questioned whether it was not possible for them to simply put the facts they want before the court, in an affidavit issued on behalf of the government. But Maenetje said this is not possible, as there will be a conflict of interest. 'It is in the interest of justice that the court does not make a finding on part of the facts. All relevant information must be placed before it,' Maenetje argued. The Foundation for Human Rights and the applicants, meanwhile, argued that there is no case for intervention. Advocate Matthew Chaskalson SC told the court that the law is clear on this. He pointed out that Mbeki and Mabandla turned to the court in their individual capacities, as they no longer hold their previous offices. 'They are not affected by an order the court will issue in the constitutional damages case. They cannot merely intervene to dispute allegations made against them,' Chaskalson said. He added that if the court allowed them to intervene, it would cause chaos, as everyone who thinks they may be implicated in litigation would then try to intervene in that case. Chaskalson said if Mbeki wanted to set the record straight, there are other remedies open to him, such as the law of defamation. 'But you cannot just jump into a dispute that is not your dispute,' he argued. Judgment reserved.
