Lake v King
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1845 |
| Date | 01 January 1845 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 85 E.R. 137
COURT OF KING'S BENCH
[131] 20. lake versus king. S. C. 1 Lev. 240. 1 Sid. 414. 2 Keb. 361, 462, 496, 659, 801, 832. The printing of a false and scandalous petition to a Committee of the House of Commons, and delivering copies thereof to the members of the Committee, is justifiable, because it is in the order and course of proceedings in Parliament, of which the King's Courts will take judicial notice.(l) Action upon the case for printing and publishing a scandalous libel of the plaintiff Lake, by the defendant King. The plaintiff declared that for the six last years, he (1) This case is cited and recognised by Lord Manafield in 2 Burr. 810, 811, Astley K. B. Xiv.-5* 138 LAKE V, KING 1WMS. SAUND. 132. was a doctor of laws, and vicar general to the Bishop of Lincoln, throughout the whole diocese; in which office he had demeaned himself justly and uncorruptly, without any extortion, corruption, or oppression; yet the defendant on the first day of December, in the 18th year of the reign of the now King, caused to be printed and delivered, published and dispersed to divers subjects of our said lord the now King, a certain false, malicious and scandalous libel of the plaintiff, in the execution of his office, in this form, viz. "To the honourable the Committee of Parliament for Grievances, the humble petition of Edward King, of Gray's Inn, in the county of Middlesex, Esquire, sheweth," &c. (and in fact the petition charged the plaintiff with many horrible and great abuses, such as extortion, oppression, vexation, and other misdetnesuors in his office), whereas in truth (as the plaintiff averred) all the matter contained in the said libel was false and malicious, to the damage of the plaintiff, &c. [132] The defendant pleaded in bar, that the matter contained in the petition was true, and shewed how in some particulars; wherefore the defendant said, " that upon the last day of November, in the 18th year aforesaid, he caused to be written and engrossed the said petition in the said declaration specified, and delivered the said petition, containing the said matter as aforesaid, to a Committee then and there constituted and appointed, by the Commons then and there assembled in Parliament, to hear and examine the grievances of this realm of England, which said Committee then and there had full power and authority to hear and examine grievances of this kind ; by which said Committee, the said Edward Lake afterwards, to wit, on the v. Young.(k) See also S. P. 1 Hawk. P. C. 194, s. 8, 195, s. 12, 196, s. 15, fol. edit. So no false or scandalous matter contained in articles of the peace exhibited bo justices of the peace; 4 Rep, 14 b. Cutler v. Dixon; or in any other proceeding in a regular course of justice, will make it libellous. 2 Inst. 228. Dyer, 285, Lord Beauchamp v. Sir Richard Croft*. 1 Eol. Abr. 87 (M.), pi. 4, S. C. Sir W. Jones, 431, Boulttm v. Clapham. 2 Bulst. 269, Anfield v. FeverhUl. 2 Burr. 808, Astley v. Yownrj, 3 Bac. Abr. 494, 495. Ibid. 492, 493, The King v. Baity. And, 229, S. C. 4 Rep. 14 b. Buckley v. Wood; as to which last case it may be observed, that the distinction taken in the second resolution, between cases where the Court has and where it has not jurisdiction, has been often denied; for that in either case no action will lie. 2 Lutvv. 1571, per Powell Justice, in Gwinne v. Poole. 1 Hawk. P. C. 194, s. 8.(/) (k) [It was also cited and recognised, but distinguished, by Lord Denman C.J., Littledale and Patteson Js. in the celebrated case of Stockilale v. Hansard, 9 A. & E. 1, 150, 171, 208, 210. 3 Perr. & D. 330, in which the Court of K. B. held it to be no defence to an action for publishing a libel, that the defamatory matter was part of a document which had been, by order of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Times Publishing Bhd and Others v S Sivadas
...the written representations were made on an occasion of absolute privilege. The defendant relied greatly on the decision in Lake v King 1 Wms, Saund 131; 85 ER 137. A Committee in Parliament in England had been formed to look into grievances of the populace. The defendant published a petiti......
- S Sivadas; Times Publishing Bhd and Others
-
Times Publishing Bhd and Others v Sivadas
...of California v Johnson-Smith [1972] 1 QB 422; [1972] 1 All ER 378 (refd) Goffin v Donnelly (1881) 6 QBD 307 (refd) Lake v King (1667) 1 Wms Saund 131; 85 ER 137 (folld) Parliamentary Privilege Act 1770, In re [1958] AC 331 (refd) R v Murphy (1986) 64 ALR 498 (refd) R v Secretary of State f......
- S Sivadas; Times Publishing Bhd and Others