Chalmers v Payne and Another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1835 |
| Date | 01 January 1835 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 150 E.R. 67
EXCHEQUER OF PLEAS.
S. C. 5 Tyr. 766; 1 Gale, 69; 4 L. J. Ex. 151.
[156] chalhekh òv. payne and another. Exch. of Pleas. 1835.-In an action for a libel, on not guilty pleaded, it appeared that the libel (which was contained in a newspaper) purported to be the account of the trial of a former action, brought by the same plaintiff for a libel against third parties, and after stating the libel in the original action, and the facts proved by the then defendants, arid the summing up of the Judge, stated that the jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, with 301. damages. No evidence was given as to any such trial having-, in fact, taken place, or whether the report was fair or not. The Judge left it to the jury to say, whether the report, although it contained some allegations injurious to the plaintiff, was, if taken altogether with the statement of the verdict being in his favour, injurious to the plaintiff' on the face of it; and the jury having found for the defendant, the Court refused to grant a rule for a new trial. [S. C. 5 Tyr. 766; 1 Gale, 69; 4 L. J. Ex. 151.] This was an action against the defendants for a libel, published by them in the Morning Post newspaper. The libel for which this action was brought professed to contain the account of the trial of an action, brought by the present plaintiff against the proprietors of the John Hull, for a libel After stating what the libel was, and the facts proved at the trial by the defendants in the original action, under a justification, together with the summing up of the Chief .Justice in that action, it stated also, that the jury found u verdict for the plaintiff with 301. damages. The defendants in the present action pleaded the general issue. At the trial before Lord Abinger, C. B., at the Middlesex sittings after last Hilary Term, the newspaper containing the report was read in evidence, but no evidence was adduced to shew whether the trial had taken place or not, or whether the report wag or was not a fair and impartial report of the trial. The learned Chief Baron leftj it to the Jury to say, whether the statement was made in such a manner as to shew that it had been published with a malicious motive; and if they were of that opinion, then to find a verdict for the plaintiff, but if otherwise, for the defendants. The jury found a verdict for the defendants. Stammers now moved for a new trial, oh the ground of misdirection, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Goh Chok Tong; JB Jeyaretnam
-
John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd v Rivkin
...Properties Mortgage & Investment Society Ltd v Odhams Press Ltd [1940] 1 KB 440 at 452. 26Chalmers v Payne (1835) 2 Cr M & R 156 at 159 [ 150 ER 67 at 68]; Bik v Mirror Newspapers Ltd [1979] 2 NSWLR 679 at 682, 683-684; Monte v Mirror Newspapers Ltd [1979] 2 NSWLR 663 at 27Mirror Newspapers......
-
Stern v Piper
...say, the defamatory sting of the article had been wholly removed by surrounding words. Then, to use Baron Alderson's famous phrase in Chalmers v Payne (1835) 2 CrMR 156: "The bane and the antidote must be taken together." But such cases are rare and this plainly is not one of them.) 63 The ......
-
Morris (Margaret), Gleaner Company Ltd and Ken Allen v Hugh Bonnick
...light on that passage.' The locus classicus is a passage from the judgment of Alderson B in Chambers v Payne (1835) 2 Cr M & R 156 at 159, 150 ER 67 at 68, where he said: 'But the question here is, whether the matter be slanderous or not, which is a question for the jury; who are to take th......