SLANDER ACTION

Grey River Argus, 19 June 1933, Page 5

SLANDER ACTION

BODDIE v. SIEVWRIGHT Counsel’s Addresses (1‘ r Proas Association) WELLINGTON, June 17. In the Boddie-Sievwright slander case, G A. Lawrence. Analytical Consulting chemist, said that from an analysis that he made of the clarogene preparation and the other preparation, nados, produced by the Christchurch company, it was obvious that the two products were manufactured from entirely different formulas. In reply to a question, witness said that the preparations contained the same ingredients, but not in the same proportions. Mr. O’Leary, addressing the Court, said that, so far as the case in general was concerned, he submitted that the proceedings had shown, to use plaintiff’s own words to Neill and Sievwright, that he was a man with no reputation to lose. If it .came to an assessment of damages, then it was submitted that the plaintiff’s words could be applied and that he would not be entitled to any damages. Counsel further submitted that all the occasions of the alleged use of the words were occasions of qualified privilege. He submitted that there was no evidence that the defendant had used the occasions otherwise than honestly. On another branch of the defence, it was contended that it had been proved that Boddie was a rogue, and that what the defence set out to justify had been amply justified. Mr. Evans Scott, counsel for Boddie, in his address submitted that the statements alleged by plaintiff were clearly slanderous and that thete was no justification for their use. lie contended, among other things, that it had been shown, from a. legal point of view, that the formula taken over by the Christchurch Company and used by the Company, was not Boddie’s formula. Pealing with the question of privilege, which ho submitted did not exist, counsel said that, if there were any doubt about the matter, it was destroyed by the defendant ’s conduct. It had been shown, ho argued, that the defendant acted maliciously- Counsel referred to testimonials as to Boddie’s character and to the evidence ol witnesses whrt had sworn that, in their dealings with plaintiff, they had found Boddie mi honest man. When the Com I adjourned Mr. Evans Scott had not concluded his address. The hearing will be resumed on Mondav.