John Campbell, on behalf of Patrice, argued that every South African had the right to dignity irrespective of social or financial standing. He added that the businessman's reputation was damaged by allegations based on - "as one world political leader might say - fake news".

Luyanda Nyangiwe, on behalf of BLF, argued the remarks were "fair comment" and not facts. He added that Motsepe had not said his business interests or meetings were harmed by the allegations.

Campbell argued that for the remarks to be classified as protected speech, they needed to be based on facts.

Nyangiwe said political debate and speech in SA has always been "robust". This was a political matter and Mngxitama had used "emotive language".

He added that the BLF based the remarks on Patrice Motsepe's ties and an audio recording which they believe proved that Motsepe was involved.

After the BLF made remarks, they sent questions to Motsepe. Campbell argued that for the BLF to do so, after making their comments, was a fishing expedition and the damage was already done.

Nyangiwe argued that Motsepe, by not answering the questions, proved his involvement because "he went to court to evade answering the questions".

The matter will go to trial.