Day 177 - 26 Oct 95 - Page 45


     
     1        page 173, explaining why it is that one is not allowed to
     2        ask people what they thought the words meant; one is not
     3        allowed to have evidence about what the words are intended
     4        to mean; or, indeed, any other evidence in explanation of
     5        the natural and ordinary meaning.
     6
     7        Then the trade libel cases, if I can call them that,
     8        starting with South Hetton Coal C. V. N.E. News
     9        Association, which is divider 9.  It is perhaps worth
    10        noticing the headnote, which is mercifully short.  It says:
    11
    12                  "An action of libel will lie at the suit of
    13             an incorporated trading company in respect of a
    14             libel calculated to injure its reputation in the
    15             way of its business, without proof of special
    16             damage.
    17                  The sanitary condition of a large number of
    18             cottages let by the proprietors of a colliery to
    19             their workmen is a matter of public interest,
    20             fair  comment on which is not libellous."
    21
    22        I think, in the end, the Court of Appeal held that the case
    23        was one of fair comment.  The passage about traders and
    24        trade libels starts at page 138, in the judgment of Master
    25        of the Rolls, Lord Esher.
    26
    27   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  The second page is well on into the report.
    28
    29   MR. RAMPTON:  I have read this to your Lordship before, so
    30        perhaps I need not read the whole of it again.  At the
    31        bottom of page 138, there is a couple of sentences which
    32        your Lordship may find helpful.  It is the last complete
    33        sentence on the page.
    34
    35             "It may be published of man in business that he
    36             conducts his business in a manner which shews
    37             him to be a foolish or incapable man of
    38             business.  That would be a libel on him in the
    39             way of his business, as it is called - that is
    40             to say, with regard to his conduct of his
    41             business."
    42
    43        That merely reflects what I suggested to your Lordship this
    44        morning might be the lowest rung of trade libels,
    45        foolishness or incompetence.
    46
    47        Then a passage which goes all the way down page 139, in
    48        passing, giving an example of the man who sells wine.  At
    49        the bottom of the page, the Master of the Rolls says:
    50 
    51             "In the present case, assuming that the article 
    52             complained of had not related to a matter of 
    53             public interest, the only question would have
    54             been whether it contained statements with regard
    55             to the conduct by the plaintiffs' company of
    56             their business, tending to shew that it was so
    57             improper and inefficient as to bring them into
    58             contempt or discredit.  If the jury found that
    59             it did, the plaintiffs would be entitled to
    60             damages at large, without giving any evidence of

Prev Next Index