An action was brought to recover damages on the ground that the defender had publicly stated that the pursuer had made to him certain statements. The statements were of a character likely to prove very unpopular. Issues were allowed whether the defender’s statements ‘are false and were made with the design of exposing, and did expose, the pursuer to public hatred, ridicule, and contempt.’ The defender took a counter-issue whether the pursuer had made the statements attributed to him. At the trial the presiding judge ruled that if the jury thought the counter issue proved they must return a verdict for the defender. Pursuer’s counsel maintained that the counter-issue only partially countered the issues; that it did not meet the holding up to hatred; that so the pursuer might get a verdict even though the counter issue were proved.
Held, on a bill of exceptions, that the direction of the presiding judge was right.
Citations:
[1916] SLR 200
Links:
Jurisdiction:
Scotland
Defamation
Updated: 23 April 2022; Ref: scu.618258