A newspaper article stated that in Queenstown instructions were issued ‘by the ‘Roman Catholic religious authorities that all Protestant shop ‘assistants were to be discharged.’ 7 pursuers averred that they were the sole persons who exercised religious authority in name and on behalf of the Roman Catholic Church in Queenstown.
Held: They were entitled to sue for libel as being individually defamed. Lord President Dunedin said: ‘I think it is quite evident that if a certain set of people are accused of having done something, and if such accusation is libellous, it is possible for the individuals in that set of people to show that they have been damnified, and it is right that they should have an opportunity of recovering damages as individuals.’
Judges:
Lord President Dunedin
Citations:
1912 SC 359
Cited by:
Cited – Knuppfer v London Express Newspaper Ltd HL 3-Apr-1944
The plaintiff complained that the defendant’s article was defamatory in implying that he was an agent of Hitler. He was representative in Great Britain of a political party of Russian emigres known as Mlado Russ or Young Russia. The total membership . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Scotland, Defamation
Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.463693