Day 177 - 26 Oct 95 - Page 33
1
2 Then, my Lord, at the bottom of page 9 -- and this, again,
3 is important. I know your Lordship knows this, but it is,
4 we believe, as well as to notice it specifically.
5
6 "(9) The court is not at this stage concerned
7 with merit or demerits of any possible defence."
8
9 Then Lewis v. Daily Telegraph, which is the next divider
10 number 2. I am not, if your Lordship will forgive me, very
11 often going to read the headnotes to these cases unless
12 they actually assist in the decision your Lordship has to
13 make.
14
15 MR. JUSTICE BELL: No.
16
17 MR. RAMPTON: The question in the case, as your Lordship will
18 remember, was whether the words used in that particular
19 case were capable of imputing guilt to the plaintiffs as
20 opposed to suspicion. That is not, we would respectfully
21 submit, a question which really arises in this case
22 because, if this leaflet does anything at all, it imputes
23 guilt; it is couched in terms of factual assertion,
24 accusation and uncertainty.
25
26 So, for that purpose, the Lewis case is perhaps not all
27 that useful. My Lord, there is a passage in the middle of
28 page 258. Actually, at the top is probably where one
29 should start. And it is very trite learning, so having
30 read one such passage perhaps I need not read others. This
31 is Lord Reid.
32
33 "The gist of the two paragraphs is that the
34 police, the City Fraud Squad, were inquiring
35 into the appellant's affairs. There is no doubt
36 that in actions for libel the question is what
37 the words would convey to the ordinary man: it
38 is not one of construction in the legal sense."
39
40 MR. MORRIS: Sorry, what page?
41
42 MR. RAMPTON: 258.
43
44 MR. JUSTICE BELL: In divider 2.
45
46 MR. MORRIS: Yes, I have got it.
47
48 MS. STEEL: Which paragraph?
49
50 MR. RAMPTON: The first big paragraph at the top of the page.
51
52 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Starting at the end of the second line: "There
53 is no doubt...."
54
55 MR. RAMPTON: "There is no doubt that in actions for libel
56 the question is what the words would convey to
57 the ordinary man: it is not one of construction
58 in the legal sense. The ordinary man does not
59 live in an ivory tower and he is not inhibited
60 by a knowledge of the rules of construction. So
