Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DAMAGES AWARDED

VERDICT IN LIBEL ACTION CLAIM AGAINST LABOUR NEWSPAPER I Per Press- Association. J AUCKLAND, Aug. 12. A verdict for £375 damages for libel was given by the jury in the S a.j. ?nr Caurt in favour of Francis Simpson, of Auckland, printer, against the New Zealand Worker Printing and Publishing Company, Limited, Wellington, pub dhers of the Standard, and its publisher, John Glover. Plaintiff, Simpson had claimed £lOOO damages, because in a report in the Standard o£ Magistrate’s Court proceedings in Auckland last April it had relcrred to him as a Communist and “associated with the Communist paper. The People’s Voice.” The case was tried by Mr. Justice Fair. Moving for a non-suit Mr. Johnstone, K.C., asid that the word.? complained of. used in the ordinary sense, were not defamatory. To call a man a Communist was not defamatory. Com - munists were a recognised political party, members of which stood for election at the recent elections. In deciding to reserve the motion foi a non-suit, His Honour said his diret tion to the jury would be that if from the evidence and from matters of common knowledge they considered that the word “Communist” had a meaning which brought the man so descrioea into contempt or lowered him in the estimation of the general public, or in any way lowered the opinion that other people held of him. then it was to be considered defamatory. They were not bound by the strict dictionary definition of Communist.

Mr. Johnstone said that plaintiff had one penny of damages b* reason of anything that had been published in the Standard. It had pubnsi. ed not only the report complained of but in succeeding issues full reports of the proceedings in the Magistrates Court, of the magistrate's juGgment and also an apology tG plaintiff. Reports in the local daily newspapers had also made the position quite clear and Simpson had not been in any way injured. The fact was that at a time of war when it was illegal la do so, plaintiff had printed thousands of pamphlets for the Ccmmu.-.i- t Party knowing that they were intended for distribution, among the people and that their object was to re tard the war effort, said counsel, it was a fair inference that if he did not subscribe to these views he would not have taken part in circulating them and all the Standard did was to fall into a very natural mistake. The man was judged by what he did and not by any political principles which he might privately profess. It was not a rase for anything more than nominal damages. Mr. Dickson, for plaintiff, said plaintiff was just as loyal as any other citizen in Auckland. He had given evidence that his reputation and also his health and his financial position had Deen affected by this defamation, and that was uncontradicted. Mr. Dickson said that if the Standard had made any inquiry it would have found that Simpson was no Communist. There was no justification whatever for saying that he was associated with The People’s Voice. His Honour said the Standard had published a heading implying that Simpson was a Communist ana had included him with others as associated with a Communist newspaper. They could accept plaintiff’s contiadiction of both statements and they might think it was hardly in dispute that they were libellous in the sense of tenuing to bring him into hatred, contempt or ridicule or to lower him in the estimation oi right-thinking people. They were entitled to attach to the woil Communist all the meaning that the ordinary reader of a newspaper would attach to it to-day and they might think it meant that a person was a disloyal and bad citizen. Admiration of the Communist Party seemed to be reserved almost exclusively for the Government of Russia ana at tne last election the majority of electors repudiated these beliefs. The jury might think it proper to grant sufficient damages to compensate plaintiff for any actual loss he had suffered up to the present and for any injury to his reputation. The jury’s verdict for plaintiff wai giver, after a retirement of 2 hours and 25 minutes. His Honour allowed costs according to scale.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WC19400813.2.63

Bibliographic details

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 84, Issue 189, 13 August 1940, Page 6

Word Count
707

DAMAGES AWARDED Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 84, Issue 189, 13 August 1940, Page 6

DAMAGES AWARDED Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 84, Issue 189, 13 August 1940, Page 6

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert