FARTHING DAMAGES IN ACTION FOR LIBEL

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 71, Issue 291, 8 December 1928, Page 7

FARTHING DAMAGES IN ACTION FOR LIBEL

ECHO OF “MR. A” CASE i [ Australian frejs Ass 7.. 1 LONDON, Dec. 6. There was a sensational ending to a libel action brought by William Cooper Hobbs, who figured in the “Mr A” case. Hobbs sued the Liverpool Evening Express in connection with a sketch of his life imputing dishonesty. The jury intimated that it desired to find for defendants. Lord Hewart gave judgment to defendants on the ground that plaintiff had been found a verdict for a farthing. He announced that the documents would be impounded and sent to the Public Prosecutor. In the closing stages Lord Hewart said: “An interesting point arises. The jury has twice expressed the opinion that there must be a verdict for defendants if the law allows, and the most damage plaintiff has suffered is a farthing. In connection with the printed words that are defamatory, the law presumes that there is some damage. Is that, presumption to be rebutted? May plaintiff appear obviously so worthless a person that it is impose sible that he can suffer damage from any libel?” * Mr Birkett said: “I can conceive such a case that even a verdict of a farthing would be a judgment for defendants. 1 have paid into Court a pound which is 19s 11 Jd too much.” Lord Hewart: I gather you ask for judgment for defendants with costs.” He then gave judgment accordingly. The jury formally awarded Hobbs a farthing damages.