SLANDER ALLEGED

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 131, 30 November 1933, Page 15

SLANDER ALLEGED

£15 DAMAGES AWARDED

Judgment for £15 and costs was civen in the Magistrate's Court today in favour of'T. H. Johnston, who claimed £50 from'J;.TV Owen -as damages for alleged slander arising from a statement made on September 5 by the defendant concerning the plaintiff in the following words:—"l see they put you in gaol for stealing fruit. That's where they ought to keep y°The facts of the case, said Mr. W. F. ' Stilwell, S.M., in his reserved judgment, were that on September 5 the plaintiff, who was a wholesale fruit and vegetable vender, was at his gate an Adelaide Eoad, and when the defendant, who resided almost opposite, was nearing his home he called out across the road to the plaintiff the words complained of. It seemed that some months previously a mat named Johnston had been before tho Court for stealing fruit from the auction mart, but he was not the plaintiff. Some children were about at the time, and somo of the Words were heard by a passerby. On September 6 solicitors for the plaintiff demanded an apology and a retraction,- but the defendant replied that having made no such accusation ho would make no apology. "I was not satisfied with the evidence o"f tho defendant or his demeanour in the box," said Mr. Stilwell. "He said lie heard an obnoxious sound called 'the raspberry,' and some remark by the plaintiff which he did not catch. He says ho replied, 'That's all right. I don't want a box of fruit. It might cost mo a. tenner.' He said he meant nothing in particular, and when pressed could not explain, what; ho meant or to what his words .referred. I am not prepared to'accept his evidence." Counsel for the defendant had raised a non-suit point that as no damages had been proved by tho plaintiff he could not succeed, and tho Magistrate reserved judgment to consider it and peruse tho evidence more closely. "Ono of the four exceptions where slander i 3 actionable per so without proof of special damage," said Mr. Stilwoll, "is 'imputation.that plaintiff has committed a criminal offence.'The words used by the defendant clearly bear that imputation and meaning, and no damages need be proved as following from the same. However, the plaintiff has vindicated his character by these proceedings, but the defendant must understand ho cannot lot his views of the plaintiff havo free rein and make such a serious public allegation without i incurring, liability."

Mr. W. G. L. Mcllish appeared for tho plaintiff, and Mr. D. Jackson for the defendant.