A high court judge on Monday reserved judgment on an application by a University of Florida law professor to sue Cape High Court Judge President John Hlophe for defamation.

Winston Nagan is seeking over R6-million for remarks Hlophe made about him while delivering a judgment in March 2007.

But before anyone can sue a judge, they have to secure the permission of the court in which the action is to be launched.

Hlophe, who has already offered what Nagan has labelled a "grudging and conditional" apology to Nagan, is not opposing the application, though he does intend to fight the R6-million claim.

So when counsel for both sides appeared in court on Monday, the main argument was on the issue of the costs surrounding the application.

The matter was heard by a judge imported from the Northern Cape division, Steven Majiedt. Hlophe was not present.

Anwar Albertus, for Nagan, told the judge Hlophe had ignored Nagan's letter asking for permission to sue, leaving Nagan with no option but to lodge a formal application.

There had been "almost a recalcitrant attitude and an abuse of process by the judge president".

However Hlophe's senior counsel Brian Pincus said his client had been "forced" by the costs issue to come to court, even though he did not oppose the application for permission.

Hlophe had done nothing wrong, and had acted appropriately.

Majiedt reserved his ruling, saying he hoped to deliver it on Thursday.

What gave rise to Nagan's claim was an appeal he heard as an acting judge, alongside Hlophe, in late 2006.

When Hlophe handed down the judgment in March 2007, he told the court that the understanding had been that Nagan would write the ruling "which is in accordance with the practice in this division".

However, he said, Nagan had left the country, "for Florida, I think, in the United States", and attempts to get hold of him had been unsuccessful.

"In fact, there were other matters in respect of which he did not write judgments. Other colleagues have had to write judgments for him."

Nagan claims that these words meant he was unprofessional and guilty of dereliction of his duty as a judge, and that Hlophe had damaged his international reputation.

Albertus told the court on Monday that on the contrary, Nagan was industrious and professional, and had left all his contact details with both Hlophe and the deputy judge president of the division.

He also said there was legal precedent that if a judicial officer acted maliciously or in a way that was not related to the case before him, he lost his qualified privilege against being sued.