LIBEL CASE.

Waikato Times, Volume 99, Issue 16652, 18 November 1925, Page 8

LIBEL CASE.

FOX v. GOODFELLOW,. APPLICATION FOR JUDGMENT. (By Telegraph—Press Association.' AUCKLAND, Tuesday. Mr Northorot't, for defendant, moved for a non-suit as regards the verdict on the first Issue, which was as follows: Did defendant, on or about July 14. 1925, referring to plaintiffs period of war sendee, say to Charles Parker concerning the plaintiff the following: “Have you ever heard that Fox was reported twice as a spy,” meaning thereby that plaintiff was of a base and traitorous character and had committed a serious crime? —The jury answered in the affirmative, the damages on the -issue being assessed at £3OO. Mr. Northcroft said he realised that his client must submit to judgment as to the verdict under the other headings. With regal’d, however, to the first issue, he submitted that the charge against defendant which it involved was slander, and not libel, and that, as plaintiff had not claimed special damages, he could not recover under that heading. The words “Have you ever heard that Fox was reported twice as a spy?” meant only a suggestion that Fox had been under suspicion of being a spy, but had not in fact been proved to be such. No special damages had been either proved or claimed, and having regard to the rules affecting the law of slander, only special damages could be obtained the actual commission of a crime had'been imputed to plaintiff. - Mr. Seymour urged that special damages had been proved—that The verdict of the- jury could bo taken to be a granting of special damages. Further, he claimed that the words, as found by the jury against defendant, did amount to an accusation of the substantive offence of spying, as distinguished from a statement of suspicion. Ilis Honor reserved his judgment.