The court considered the protection of a witness in court from defamation actions and otherwise.
Held: Sir Alexander Cockburn CJ said: ‘I am very far from desiring to be considered as laying down as law that what a witness states altogether out of the character and sphere of a witness, or what he may say dehors the matter in hand, is necessarily protected.’
Bramwell JA said: ‘I am by no means sure that the word ‘relevant’ is the best word that could be used; the phrases used by the Lord Chief Baron and the Lord Chancellor in Dawkins v Lord Rokeby, would seem preferable, ‘having reference,’ or ‘made with reference to the inquiry” and ‘I think the words ‘having reference to the inquiry’ ought to have a very wide and comprehensive application, and ought not to be limited to statements for which, if not true, a witness might be indicted for perjury, or the exclusion of which by the judge would give ground for a new trial; but ought to extend to that which a witness might naturally and reasonably say when giving evidence with reference to the inquiry as to which he had been called as a witness.’
Judges:
Sir Alexander Cockburn CJ, Bramwell JA
Citations:
(1876) 2 CPD 53
Cited by:
Cited – Samuels v Coole and Haddock (a Firm) CA 22-May-1997
The defendant solicitors had acted for defendants in an action brought by the plaintiff. They swore and filed an affidavit in support of an application to strike out elements of the action. The affidavit spoke as to abusive and threatening calls and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Defamation
Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.443550