- J12 P175 At paragraph 601, Gatley illustrates the operation of fair comment by citing Davis v Shepstone (3). In that case, the respondent was the Resident Commissioner of Zululand, South Africa. The appellants published in their newspaper, serious allegations with reference to the official conduct of the respondent. They stated that he had not only himself violently assaulted a Zulu Chief, but had set on his native Policemen to assault others. Upon the assumption that these statements were true, they commented upon his conduct in terms of great severity. At trial, it was proved that the allegations were absolutely without foundation. And no attempt was made to support them by evidence. The defence of fair comment failed and the appellants were found liable. In the present case, the 1st respondent published the words complained of as Sokontwe....Sokontwe follows:”Levy is alleged is to being have misled been – having clandestine meetings with ...... Bevin Ndovi.......” The 2nd respondent published similar words. Their article was headed: “Charges Baseless”. And the words complained of read: “Mr. Sokontwe was alleged to have between January and August 2004 attended clandestine meetings especially on April 15, 2003, in Kabulonga with ......Mr. B. Ndovi.....” We are of the view that the words complained of against the 1st respondent are not fair comment as defined above; but a