Francis Curran V. Sc Ottish Daily Record And Sunday Mail Ltd
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judge | Lord Kingarth,Lord Hardie,Lady Paton |
| Neutral Citation | [2011] CSIH 86 |
| Court | Court of Session |
| Published date | 29 December 2011 |
| Year | 2011 |
| Date | 20 December 2011 |
| Docket Number | A952/08 |
| EXTRA DIVISION, INNER HOUSE, COURT OF SESSION | |
| Lady Paton Lord Hardie Lord Kingarth | [2011] CSIH 86 A952/08 OPINION OF THE COURT delivered by LADY PATON in the cause FRANCES CURRAN Pursuer and Reclaimer; against SCOTTISH DAILY RECORD AND SUNDAY MAIL LIMITED Defenders and Respondents: _______ |
Alt: R Dunlop, Q.C.; Balfour + Manson LLP
29 December 2011
Introduction[1] The pursuer is a member of the Scottish Socialist Party (SSP). She has been "actively involved in socialist politics for around thirty years ... At all material times she was a member of the executive committee of the SSP and a member of the Scottish Parliament (an MSP) who had been elected as an SSP candidate. She is widely known throughout Scotland as being associated with the SSP and the policies and political views it promotes" (Article 2 of Condescendence, page 6A-B of the Reclaiming Print).
[2] In a civil jury trial in June and July 2006 Tommy Sheridan, then an MSP and leader of the SSP, sought damages for defamation against News Group Newspapers Limited (NGNL). He alleged that articles in the News of the World had falsely accused him of having visited a "swingers' club", committed sexual indiscretions, and been unfaithful to his wife.
[3] The pursuer was not called as a witness by either party. On 4 August 2006 the jury found in Mr Sheridan's favour, and awarded him damages of £200,000. That same day, the pursuer joined with two other SSP members in issuing a press statement in the following terms (Article 2 of Condescendence, pages 8E-9B of the Reclaiming Print, and Answer 2, pages 13E-15A of the Print):
"Statement by Frances Curran MSP, Rosie Kane MSP and Carolyn Leckie MSP 04/08/06
We are angry that the Scottish Socialist Party has been dragged through the Court of Session for 4 long weeks and now faces another ordeal as the News of the World launches an appeal.
This was a court case we didn't want to be involved in and one that Tommy Sheridan should never have initiated.
Tommy has lied his way through this court case and we want no part in that.
We have told the truth and we stand by the minutes of our party which record the truth about Tommy Sheridan's standing down as National Convenor in November 2004 and we will resist any attempt to rewrite the SSP's history.
The most important thing now is for all SSP members to be in possession of the facts.
We are very unhappy that the courts have had this information while party members have been in the dark and we will defend and protect the democracy of the SSP.
There is no plot, no frame up of Tommy Sheridan, the idea only exists in his paranoid imagination.
The party can move forward but only on the basis of acceptance of the truth.
This is not over yet and even at this late stage it is not too late for Tommy to tell the truth.
The truth remains the truth."
[4] A further statement was issued on 4 August 2006 by the SSP United Left, a group within the SSP founded in June 2006, the pursuer being one of the founding members (Article 2 of Condescendence, page 9A-B of the Reclaiming Print, and Answer 2, pages 15B-26D of the Print). That statement deprecated the fact that Mr Sheridan's "bogus defamation action" had prejudicially affected the SSP, and described the case as an "absolute political scandal" rather than a "sex scandal". The statement commented inter alia that:
"... Tommy Sheridan's supporters have stated that this court case is part of the wider struggle of the labour movement ..."
and that Mr Sheridan had:
"... launched an incredible campaign of disinformation, inside and outside the party, alleging that he was 'done in' by those supposedly jealous of his status, or driven by personal and political ambition."
The statement also said:
"The United Left launched on 11 June 2006 condemns the misguided efforts of those who failed to uphold the truth about our party's history, our minutes, our democratic decisions and the actions of our elected office bearers. They may have done this from a misguided sense of loyalty, but they helped fuel the myth that Tommy Sheridan had been framed - a myth that they knew not to be the case."
[5] In the evening of 4 August 2006 the pursuer spoke to a journalist from The Daily Mail newspaper. She was quoted in that newspaper on 5 August 2006 as saying (Article 2 of Condescendence, page 9A of the Reclaiming Print, and Answer 2, pages 27C-28A of the Print):
"I am not surprised in a way that the jury found the way they did, because everyone hates the tabloids. But there are people who have lied their way through this trial and Tommy is one of them.
If there is any perjury investigation we have got nothing to hide. We have no problem with the police knocking on our door, because we have told the truth ... We are going to have some serious discussions in the party, because we cannot go forward on a pack of lies."
[6] On 5, 7, 8 and 9 August 2006 the defenders published a series of articles in The Daily Record, said to be based on exclusive interviews with Mr Sheridan. Another article appeared in The Sunday Mail on 6 August 2006. In the edition of The Daily Record published on 7 August 2006, a photograph of Mr Sheridan was accompanied by the words:
"I'll destroy the scabs who tried to ruin me", and
"Tommy vows to win back the leadership of Scottish Socialists".
In a summary of the content of the article, it was stated:
"In an exclusive interview with the Record Tommy Sheridan vows to fight for his political future and destroy the SSP 'scabs' who tried to ruin him ..."
Within the article it was stated inter alia:
"[Mr Sheridan] said: ... 'The majority of SSP members have clearly displayed their support for me against News of the World'. But Sheridan stressed he would be unable to work with the people who gave evidence against him.
Enemy
He said: 'There's no way I could be convener of a party with its apparatus controlled by those who have tried to politically undermine me ... I will find it very difficult to continue to be associated with individuals whom I consider collaborators with the enemy, who have become political scabs."
The article continued:
"Referring to three MSPs who testified against him, Mr Sheridan said 'Should I stand and be re-elected [as convener of the SSP], then Carolyn Leckie, Rosie Kane, and [the pursuer] and their supporters will have to decide whether they stay in a party led by me. I'm not in favour of expulsions even though I consider those who lined up with broad smiles on their faces as they entered the court to be political scabs. When a socialist takes on one of the most ruthless anti-union and anti-socialist empires in the world and wins, you would expect socialists to rejoice.
The fact that some so-called socialists have strained their voices in condemnation of me, rather than in jubilation, exposes the level of personal hatred that has infected these people.
I believe there has been a statement issued by three MSPs that they will not work with me. Not speaking to them ever again will not keep me up at night.
But if these individuals have declared they'll no longer work with me politically, they stand exposed as political blackmailers trying to hold their party to ransom ..."
The article further added:
"Sheridan says he believed he had a deal by which colleagues would support his legal fight if he quit the leadership. He admitted he was 'naïve' not to suspect a political plot to destroy him ... [Sheridan's] political future depends on whether he senses enough support among the rank-and-file membership, whether he stands, and whether he wins ... he believes the SSP can still be a force in Scottish politics."
Further text can be found in the copy production in the Joint Appendix, and in the Lord Ordinary's opinion.
[7] The newspaper carried photographs of four MSPs, one being the pursuer, with the word "SCAB" in large print superimposed on each photograph.
[8] In November 2008, the pursuer raised an action of defamation against the defenders, averring inter alia that the innuendo contained in the article was that, notwithstanding her professed commitment to socialism and trade unionism, the pursuer had been happy to align herself with, and to assist, the anti-socialist NGNL, in furtherance of a plot to destroy Mr Sheridan's political career, and that in consequence she was a "scab" and a "political scab", failing to act in accordance with her publicly professed principles in a way which was dishonourable, hypocritical and lacking in integrity, all of which was untrue. In particular, the article appeared to suggest that she had given evidence as a witness for NGNL against Mr Sheridan, when she had not (Article 5 of Condescendence).
[9] The defenders lodged defences, inter alia taking a general plea to the relevancy and specification of the pursuer's action, and also a plea of qualified privilege in the following terms:
"5. Separatim. The article complained of being subject to qualified privilege, and not having been actuated by malice on the part of the defenders, the defenders should be assoilzied."
[10] A debate took place. On 26 March 2010 the Temporary Lord Ordinary (M Wise QC) sustained the first and fifth pleas in law for the defenders and dismissed the action. The Lord Ordinary stated inter alia:
"[29] ... I do not consider that this was an attack on the private character of the pursuer but rather on her political decisions and political loyalties. I have considered whether the article, taken as a whole, would tend to lower the pursuer in the estimation of right thinking members of society generally, or be likely to affect her adversely in the estimation of reasonable people generally. Again, I do not consider that it would have that effect ...
[30] Accordingly, I do not consider that the article under complaint amounts to defamation of the pursuer.
[31] In any event, even if some of the terms used in the article could be regarded as defamatory, I consider...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
HH Prince Moulay Hicham Ben Abdallah Al Alaoui of Morocco v Elaph Publishing Ltd
...about actions and systems of government, see Lingens v Austria (1986) 8 EHRR 407 at paragraph 41 and the analysis in Curran v Scottish Daily Record and Sunday Mail Ltd (2011) CSIH 86 at paragraphs 51 and 53. 9 The Judge referred to the evidence which had been lodged on each side, and found......
-
(first) William Roddie And (second) Spectrum Properties (scotland) Limited Against Associated Newspapers Limited
...for the malice of its agent or employee. Reference was made to Curran v Scottish Daily Record and Sunday Mail Ltd in the Inner House. (2012 SLT 359, at paragraphs [36] to [41] and [61] to [65]) [16] Counsel for the defenders next anticipated two of the pursuers’ contentions which were conta......
-
His Highness Prince Moulay Hicham Ben Abdullah Al Alaoui of Morocco v Elaph Publishing Ltd
...about actions and systems of government, see Lingens v Austria (1986) 8 EHRR 407 at paragraph 41 and the analysis in Curran v Scottish Daily Record and Sunday Mail Ltd [2011] CSIH 86 at paragraphs 51 and 53. 15 It is also relevant to note that the claim was brought in relation to the " natu......
-
Robert Crow v Boris Johnson
...the common law of England. It was recently stated in the judgment of Lady Paton in Curran v Scottish Daily Record and Sunday Mail Limited [2011] CSIH 86; [2012] S.L.T 359 at paras [45] and [53] in which she gave reasons for deciding that the words complained of in that action did not have a......