CLAIM WITHDRAWN

Timaru Herald, Volume CLVIII, Issue 23282, 18 August 1945, Page 4

CLAIM WITHDRAWN

Alleged Defamation Of Character Regret Expressed By Defendant (N.Z.P.A.) WELLINGTON, Aug. 18. A claim for £lOOO damages brought by George Laing, a general inspector of Government motor vehicles, against Ernest Harold Langford, a Ministerial secretary, for alleged defamation of character and injury to his credit as a Civil Servant and a member of the Labour Party, at the conference of the New Zealand Labour Party in November last year, was withdrawn by leave of the Supreme Court at Wellington to-day. Mr T. P. Cleary told the Chief Justice (the Rt. Hon. Sir Michael Myers) that his client, Langford, had fully accepted Laing’s reputation and the truth of Langford's statement that Laing had gone to a weekly newspaper with information about the sale of used Army motor vehicles because, he was disgruntled, and Langford also unreservedly withdrew the statement made by him and expressed regret that it should have occasioned Laing worry and anxiety.

Mr Cleary said that the proceedings were based on a statement made by the defendant to the effect that the plaintiff had furnished to the newspaper information as to alleged irregularities in the sale of used Army vehicles in Christchurch. The plaintiff repudiated any such suggestion, whether or not privilege had attached to the circumstances under which the statement had been made.

Dr. O. C. Mazengarb, appearing for Laing, said that the statement complained of was a serious one, involving, as it did, the imputation that plaintiff had broken his obligation of secrecy as a trusted Civil Servant. “A similar attack had been made under cover of privilege in the House of Representatives.” continued Dr. Mazengarb. “He was invited to repeat it outside the House so that proceedings could be brought, but did not do so. When the defendant made his allegations at the Labour Party conference and failed to withdraw it after two letters had been sent to him requesting him to do so, the plaintiff was reluctantly obliged to commence these proceedings to vindicate his character.” As the defendant had now agreed to withdraw, and as the plaintiff had now been fully restored to his duties as a general inspector

of Government vehicles, his character had been vindicated and no good purpose could be served by proceeding with the trial. An arrangement as to costs, which was satisfactory to both parties, had been made, and the action might now be struck out. His Honour agreed to counsel’s application. There is always someone with something to sell, and someone who wants to buy—advertise.