The highly anticipated probe by Carte Blanche into the alleged fraudulent activities of notorious Malalane attorney Zietta Janse van Rensburg aired as scheduled on Sunday night, November 17.

Her attempt to stop the programme with an ‘extremely’ urgent court application was dismissed with costs.

Janse van Rensburg served both Carte Blanche and Lowvelder with her application on Saturday afternoon, November 16, and the case was heard by the Mpumalanga Division of the High Court at 15:00 on Sunday afternoon, a few hours before broadcast time. Acting Judge Naomi Engelbrecht ruled that the application lacked urgency and struck the case from the roll.

Janse van Rensburg described the broadcast as a co-ordinated attack on her as a person. She sought to indefinitely interdict Carte Blanche from broadcasting the episode, demanding the removal of ‘aggressive social media marketing’ related to the episode and all its comments, to be replaced with an apology.

ALSO READ: Another postponement in Zietta Janse van Rensburg case

Lowvelder, which according to its legal team was wrongly cited in the application, was accused of chasing sensationalism, with Carte Blanche merely acting as an enforcer. She claimed the publication ‘unashamedly exploited her for profit’ and that she had been ‘stalked and harassed’ in over 40 articles published about her since March.

Janse van Rensburg demanded that Irma Green, the author of these articles and group editor of Caxton Local Media, be barred from reporting on her. She also insisted that Green should place an apology on her own social media wall, tagging Janse van Rensburg, and post an apology on Janse van Rensburg’s wall.

ALSO READ: LPC finds Onderberg attorney guilty, court to be approached to strike Zietta off the roll

Janse van Rensburg’s demands were not limited to Lowvelder, but were directed at the JSE-listed company Caxton and CTP Publishers and Printers Limited and its operational arm, CTP Limited. She demanded that the respondents publish ‘an apology banner on their page’ for two weeks and that their marketing team should ‘share apologies on their social media groups where they typically post articles.’ She also demanded that the front page of the next two issues of Lowvelder feature an apology banner.

Her application was deemed a serious abuse of court process by the legal teams of both Carte Blanche and Lowvelder.

Adv Hendrik van Rensburg, representing Janse van Rensburg, argued that the information set to be aired was false, claiming she was not given a fair opportunity to respond and had not been notified of the programme’s content. He stated that the broadcast would cause irreparable damage to her reputation.

However, Adv Mfundo Salukazana, defending Carte Blanche, countered that Janse van Rensburg had been given the right to reply on numerous occasions and was aware of the content more than a month before the scheduled broadcast.

Despite this, she did not make use of the opportunity to respond. Carte Blanche attached correspondence with Janse van Rensburg dating back to October 16 when she was asked for an interview. In her reply the following day, she confirmed her willingness to do an interview and further wrote: “I am awaiting approval of the production team, as the complaints are dealt with in sequence and I am bound by the agreement. The bulk of the team is abroad, but I will have confirmation soonest.”

On Thursday November 14, Carte Blanche wrote her a letter to state that it had received volumes of correspondence from her, but that nothing substantive was related to the questions posed to her. A final deadline of November 15 was given to send her response.

Adv James Stone, instructed by local attorneys Du Toit-Smuts & Partners on behalf of Caxton, supported the view that the application was not urgent, stressing that the claims and allegations against Lowvelder were not pressing.

ALSO READ: ‘Skeletons Unearthed’: Zietta Janse van Rensburg targets CPA administrator in latest podcast episode

He argued that her application for the removal of all articles published by Caxton, its comments on social media and a demand for website and newspaper banner apologies were frivolous.

On Tuesday, Janse van Rensburg sent new demands to Lowvelder. She demanded to know how Lowvelder had become aware of Carte Blanche’s broadcast. Seemingly under the impression that Lowvelder – a printer and publisher – had insights into Carte Blanche‘s broadcast marketing statistics, she requested the same from Lowvelder.

ALSO READ:  BREAKING NEWS: Warrant issued for suspended attorney Zietta Janse van Rensburg

Lastly, Janse van Rensburg demanded ‘post-case reporting’ and added the following cryptic terms: “Any and all reporting on the matter after the matter: Platforms, Copies of reporting/formats of reporting, Data reach of said reporting (Share, comment, like) (all details included).”

ALSO READ: The Onderberg’s Zietta van Rensburg implicated in ‘serious misconduct’

Lowvelder’s prepublication attorney, Helene Viljoen, labelled her correspondence “a nonsensical upchuck of telegram-style terms seemingly intended to communicate that Lowvelder owes her reader data.” She added: “Lowvelder owes her no such thing and is entitled to keep reporting on her in the diligent way it has done to date.”