The appellant in instructing his agent, the respondent, wrote him a letter containing defamatory statements about certain persons into whose hands the letter got through the agent’s partner negligently dropping it, when it was picked up by a third party and the contents communicated. The appellant was sued by these persons for defamation and had to pay pounds 1769.
The appellant sued the respondent for damages for breach of his duty to keep his instructions secret. The jury found that there was a breach of duty on the respondent’s part and that the actions of damages and consequent loss to the appellant were the natural and probable consequence of the respondent’s negligence, and assessed the damages at pounds 650. The presiding judge entered judgment for the respondent on the grounds ( a) that he had no duty to keep the letter secret, and ( b) that ex turpi causa non oritur actio.
Held that the respondent had a duty to keep the letter secret; that he negligently failed in his duty; that consequently an action lay against him; but that the appellant’s loss was not the natural and probable consequence of the respondent’s negligence; and that only nominal damages therefore were due.
Judges:
Lords Finlay, Dunedin, Sumner, Parmoor, and Wrenbury
Citations:
[1920] UKHL 646, 58 SLR 646
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Agency, Defamation
Updated: 20 November 2022; Ref: scu.631531
