LaughtonSodor1872
(Isle of Man) The Bishop of Sodor and Man, in a charge to his Clergy in Convocation, commented on a speech made by a Barrister in his character of an Advocate instructed to oppose a Bill before the House of Keys, promoted by the Government, vesting additionai Ecclesiastical patronage in the Bishop, in which he impugned the conduct of the Bishop, and attributed to him motives and conduct unworthy of his character and position.
Held: The charge of a Bishop to his Clergy in Convocation is, in the ordinary sense of the term, a privileged communication; on the well-known principle that a communication made bona fide upon any subject matter in which the party has an interest, or in reference to which he has, or honestly believes he has, a duty, is privileged, if made to a person having a corresponding interest or duty, although it contains criminatory matter which, without that privilege, would be defamatory and actionable, provided that, the occasion on which the communication is made rebuts the prima facie inference of malice, in fact, arising from a statement prejudicial to the character of the Plaintiff, and the onus is upon him to prove that there was actuaI malice, that the Defendant was actuated by motives of personal spite or ill-will, independent of the occasion on which the communication was made.
The Privy Council said: ‘To submit the language of privileged communications to a strict scrutiny, and to hold all excess beyond the absolute exigency of the occasion to be evidence of malice, would in effect greatly limit, if not altogether defeat, the protection which the law throws over privileged communications.’
[1872] EngR 35, (1872) 9 Moo PC NS 318, (1872) 17 ER 534
Commonlii
Citing:
Approved – Spill v Maule CEC 1869
Complaint was made about the defamatory contents of a letter written on an occasion of privilege. It was said that the privilege was defeated by malice.
Held: The court could look to the surrounding circumstances to assess whether the language . .
Cited by:
Cited – Curran v Scottish Daily Record and Sunday Mail Ltd SCS 20-Dec-2011
The pursuer a Scottish Socialist Party Member and Scottish Parliament member had been involved as a witness (though not called) in defamation proceedings. She issued a press notice critical of one of the parties. The defender published stories based . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Defamation, Ecclesiastical
Leading Case
Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.280125