ACTION FOR LIBEL

Dominion, Volume 25, Issue 275, 16 August 1932, Page 11

ACTION FOR LIBEL

Word “Liquidator” in an Advertisement SALE OF FURNITURE Claiming that an auctioneers advertisement appearing in the “Evening Post” of April 14 had injured bis credit, his reputation and his business as a private hotelkeeper, and had exposed him to public ridicule and contempt, Ernest Charles Lawrence, proprietor of “The Portage,” Marlborough Sounds, is seeking £250 damages from Dunbar Sloane, of Wellington, auctioneer, and Blundell Brothers Ltd., of Wellington. The case was heard in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday before Mr. J. B. McNeil. S.M., who, after hearing the evidence, decided to reserve his decision. Plaintiff alleged that on April 14 of this year the defendants “falsely and maliciously caused to be printed and published in the issue of the ‘Evening Post’ of that date” an advertisement containing the words: “Auction. At 1.30 p.m., Friday. The Greatest Furnishing Auction Sale for Years. By Order of the Liquidator.” Plaintiff’s Interpretation. Plaintiff claimed that by the advertisement the defendants meant, and were understood to mean, that he was in liquidation or insolvent; that the business of a private hotelkeeper carried on by him at “The Portage” was being liquidated or sold up by reason of his insolvency; that the whole of the furnishings owned by him in connection with his business were being sold by reason of his liquidation or insolvency; and that he was going out of business. Counsel for plaintiff contended that the furnishings that had been sold did not, in point of fact, belong to plaintiff, and had never belonged to him. They belonged to a company, now defunct, known as New Zealand Tourist Resorts Ltd. This company bad never owned or conducted “The Portage.” The company, counsel continued, was formed two or three years ago, one of its objects being to develop tourist traffic and acquire from Mr. Lawrence an option over “The Portage.” The option was secured, but when the company went to the public It did not succeed. It had, however, built and furnished two annexes to “The Portage." In April of this year, the company removed its furniture from the, annexes and brought.it to Wellington, where it was sold. Framing of Words. Referring to the newspaper advertisement, counsel said that there could be no question that the advertisement was published quite innocently and In the ordinary way of business; nor was there any suggestion that Mr. Sloane was actuated by malice. Counsel did submit, however, that someone connected with.the advertisement had deliberately framed it in such a way that it was likely to harm plaintiff’s business. Following the appearance of the advertisement, counsel continued, the “Evening Post" expressed its willingness to publish an explanation in conjunction with Messrs. Dunbar Sloane, Ltd. Mr. Sloane, however, did not avail himself of the opportunity, and on June 27 or 28 -the “Evening Post” published an explanation on its own account. Plaintiff, giving evidence, said th *' a number of people had understood from the advertisement that the bailiffs were in at “The Portage,” and that he, witness, was going out of business. Advertisement Drafted. Cecil T. Cox, liquidator of New Zealand Tourist Resorts, Ltd., said that every word in the advertisement was true. He had instructed Mr. Sloane to Insert It, and the latter had drafted it from suggestions made by witness. Evidence was given by Andrew Dunbar Sloane, who said that he had submitted the advertisement to a solicitor for approval. This was done because it had been found that it was necessary to be very careful when dealing with bankruptcy stocks and with goods ordered to be sold by liquidators. The magistrate remarked that plaintiff, on his own evidence, had suffered very little damage. Should it be proved that the advertisement was libellous, then plaintiff would be entitled to some damages. They would be purely nominal He would take time to consider the case.