The plaintiff claimed in defamation after the defendant had republished an extract from a paper laid before parliament.
Held: The ‘blue book’ reflected material laid before both houses of parliament, and reproduction of it was protected under the 1840 Act.
As to whether the paper had been printed by malice, Darling J referred to an earlier case where a plea of justification had been placed on the record but the defendant at the trial had offered no evidence in support of it. Darling J added: ‘A plea of justification ought never to be put on the record unless the person believes in it and is prepared to support it with evidence’.
Judges:
Darling J
Citations:
(1908) 98 LT 64, (1908) 24 TLR 610
Statutes:
Parliamentary Privileges Act 1840 3
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – McDonalds Corp and Another v Steel and Another CA 25-Mar-1994
The plaintiff company had sued the defendants in defamation with regard to a leaflet publishd and distributed by them. The defendants argued justification. The defendants appealed against an order striking out parts of their defence, saying that the . .
Cited – McDonalds Corp and Another v Steel and Another CA 25-Mar-1994
The plaintiff company had sued the defendants in defamation with regard to a leaflet publishd and distributed by them. The defendants argued justification. The defendants appealed against an order striking out parts of their defence, saying that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Defamation, Constitutional
Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.465178
