The defendant wrote a circular letter in Zurich libelling the plaintiff, who was chairman of a company in England, but who personally lived in Ontario, Canada. That circular letter was addressed to the deputy manager and managing director of the company in England.
Held: A tort occurrs in the place where the last ingredient necessary to complete the tort happened. The publication of a defamation therefore occurs at the place where the statement is seen or received by another person: ‘It was the publication of the contents of a defamatory document to a third party which constituted the tort of libel and which alone justified the libelled party in issuing his Writ.’ The English court therefore had jurisdiction to hear the case as the libels were published to persons living in England.
Judges:
Scott, LJ
Citations:
[1948] WN 366, (1948) 92 Sol Jo 574
Citing:
Cited – Hebditch v MacIlwaine CA 1894
On the defence of common interest such as to establish qualified privilege: ‘The defendant cannot create a privilege for himself because of honest belief on his part that the person to whom he made a slanderous communication had an interest or duty . .
Cited by:
Cited – Shevill and Others v Presse Alliance SA HL 26-Jul-1996
A libel case against a French paper was rightly brought in UK despite the small (250 copies nationally and 5 in the plaintiff’s local area (Yorkshire)) circulation here. The Brussels Convention allows a claim for defamation in UK though the main . .
Cited – Kordowski v Hudson QBD 21-Oct-2011
The claimant alleged that the defendant, the chief executive of the Law Society had slandered him in a conversation with another senior lawyer. The claimant now sought summary judgment against the claimant, saying that the defence had no realistic . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Defamation, Jurisdiction
Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.537073