ALLEGED LIBEL

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22901, 2 December 1937, Page 19

ALLEGED LIBEL

NO DAMAGES GIVEN BUSINESS WOMAN'S CLAIM CITY FIRM'S CIRCULAR The hearing in the Supreme Court of an action for damages.for alleged libel was concluded before Mr. Justice Fair and a jury of four yesterday. The action was brought by Mrs. Muriel Ann Mitchell, hosiery importer (Mr. Hunt) against Brookbanks, Limited, warehousemen, and Frank Christopher Brookbanks, Thomas Cecil /Batts and Bertie Williams, the directors of the firm. The sum of £4OO was claimed for alleged libel in a circular sent out by defendant. A claim for a further £IOO for slander was abandoned as having been made too late. Mr. North appeared for the firm and Mr. Munro for the directors. Plaintiff, who went bankrupt in July, 1935, had stated on oath at a meeting of creditors that she had been " selling on consignment for Brookbanks, Limited." Brookbanks denied this in a circular sent out, and plaintiff's claim was based on the allegation that this denial was malicious and meant that she was a liar find a perjurer. ; . Non-suit Points -' At the close of 'plaintiff's case Mr. North moved for a non-suit on five separate grounds. H6 1 submitted that plaintiff had not established that tlie statement in the circular was' incorrect, and on the contrary it appeared that her own statement was innocently, correct. She had used words which no doubt appeared to» her entirely; harmless, but which branded Brookbanks, Limited, as having used Mrs. Mitchell as an agent to sell their goods. Defendants were quite within their rights in denying that. In the second place, the statement, even if tnie, was in no sense defamatory. Thirdly, the innuendoes said to be inferred from the statement were not the only reasonable br" necessary from it* Further, plaintiff had no;trade or talling/ in respect of which • she 'could be libelled, and.;finally the occasion was clearly privileged and nothing even faintly suggesting malice had been established.

Mr. Munro also applied for a nonsuit on the same grounds and further asked that Thomas Cecil Batts and Bertie Williams should be dismissed from the action on the ground that there was no evidence against them. His Honor reserved his decision on the application' for a non-suit. The Jury's Answers Addressing the' jury after counsel's addresses, His Honor submitted six issues to thepi. They would have to decide, he said, what in their opinion would be the meaning taken from defendants' circular in the special circumstances by reasonable persons. Tile onus of proving that the, statements in the letter were made without an honest belief in their truth was on plaintiff. After an hour's retirement the jury returned answers to the effect that the letter could not be taken to mean that plaintiff was a liar or perjurer, Jout only that she had made a careless or incorrect statement. The letter had not tended to lower her in the estimation of others, and its statements were all true and not made with any improper motive. They did not, therefore, award plaintiff any damages. Mr. North and Mr. Munro moved for judgment-'for plaintiffs, but His Honor granted Mf. Hunt time to consider the effect of the although His Honor said he did not see in them any grounds for a verdict for plaintiff.