The plaintiff had been the Supreme Commander of the Axis Land Forces in Central Europe. He brought an action claiming that he had been defamed in a film showing him privy to the murders of King Alexander of Yugoslavia and M. Barthou in 1934, and as having betrayed Field-Marshal Rommel in 1944. The trial had not yet occurred. The defendants sought to rely on the fact that the plaintiff chose to sue on certain parts of the film, and not on others which were also defamatory of the plaintiff, as a ground for mitigating damages.
Held: This was vigorously rejected: ‘[The defendants] plead that the respondent has been depicted in the film as having been ‘guilty of the conduct hereinafter set out the truth of which the plaintiff . . does not deny’. It surprises me that it should be considered a proper matter for pleading that a plaintiff has not thought fit to include in his action every libellous statement made about him by a defendant. It is, in my opinion, wholly improper.’ and ‘If it is said that other parts of the entire film constitute ‘circumstances in which the alleged libel was published’ (in themselves a recognised head of mitigation), I think that is a highly artificial meaning to attribute to the phrase. The real purport of this portion of paragraph 5 of the defence seems to be to make the point that the plaintiff must be taken to have admitted the truth of such accompanying derogatory statements as he is not challenged in his libel claim. That is not a matter for pleading. If it amounts to anything at all, it is a matter for comment. As a proposition of law designed to set up some sort of estoppel, I think that it has no foundation.’
Judges:
Lord Radcliffe, Viscount Simonds
Citations:
[1961] AC 1090, [1961] All ER 876
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Hunt v Evening Standard Ltd QBD 18-Feb-2011
The defamation claimant sought that certain paragraphs of the defence should be struck out.
Held: Several paragraphs of the defence were struck out, and others left. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Defamation
Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.220016
