Parmiter v Coupland and Another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1840 |
| Date | 01 January 1840 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 151 E.R. 340
EXCH. OF PLEAS.
S. C. 9 L. J. Ex. 202; 4 Jur. 701. Discussed, Capital and Counties Bank v. Henty, 1882, 7 A. C. 762; M'Inerney v. "Clareman" Printing and Publishing Company, [1903] 2 Ir. R. 370, 399. Referred to, Cox v. Lec, 1869, L. R. 4 Ex. 290; Harwood v. Harrison, 1872, L. R. 7 C. P. 628; O'Brien Marquis of Salisbury, 1889, 6 T. L. R. 133; Monson v. Tussaud, [1894] 1 Q. B. 684.
[105] parmiter v. coupland and another. Exch. of Pleas. 1840.-In an action for libel, the Judge is not bound to state to the jury, as matter of law, whether the publication complained of be a libel or not; but the proper course is for him to define what is a libel in point of law, and to leave it to the jury to aay whether the publication in question falls within that definition; and, as incidental to that, whether it is calculated to injure the character of the plaintiff. -A publication may be a libel on a private person, which would not be any libel on a person in a public capacity ; but any imputation of unjust or corrupt motives is equally libellous in either case. [S. C. 9 L. J. Ex. 202; 4 Jur. 701. Discussed, Capital and Counties Bank v. Heniy, 1882, 7 A. C. 762 ; M'Inerney v. " Clareman" Printing and Publishing Company, [1903] 2 Ir. B. 370, 399. Referred to, Cox v. Lee, 1869, L. R. 4 Ex. 290; Haneood v. Harrism, 1872, L. R. 7 C. P. 628; O'Brien v. Marquis of Salisbury, 1889, 6 T. L. R. 133 ; Mmiscm v. Tussavd, [1894] 1 Q. B. 684.] Thfa was an action on the ease for a series of libels published of the plaintiff, the late m,yor of the borough of Winchester, in the " Hampshire Advertiser " newspaper1, between the 17th of November, 1838, and the 2nd of March, 1839, imputing to him partial and corrupt conduct, and ignorance of his duties, as mayor and justice of the peace for the borough. The defendants pleaded not guilty. At the trial before Coleridge, J., at the last Winchester Assizes, the learned Judge, in the course of his summing up, stated to the jury that there was a difference with regard to censures on public- and on private persons ; that the character of persons acting in a public capacity was, to a certain extent public property, and their conduct might be more freely commented on than that of other persons : and having told the jury what, in point of law, constituted a libel, he left it to them to say whether the publications in question were an.4w.lM. PARMITER V. COTTPLAND 341...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Dr Clarence Edwin v Harta Kumpulan Sdn Bhd
-
M'Inerney v The "Clareman" Printing and Publishing Company
...R. 137. O'Brien v. The Marquis of SalisburyUNK 6 T. L. R. at p. 137. Odger v. MortimerUNK 28 L. T. (N. S.) 472. Parmiter v. CouplandENR 6 M. & W. 105. Praed v. GrahamELR 27 Q. B. D. 53. Quinlane v. MurnaneUNK 18 L. R. Ir. 53. Saxby v. EasterbrookELR 3 C. P. D. 339, at p. 342. Solomon v. Bit......
-
Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd
...the past. (1) [1] The classic definition is that given by Lord Wensleydale (then Parke B) in Parmiter v Coupland (1840) 6 M & W 105 at 108, 151 ER 340 at 341–342. He said that in cases of libel it was for the judge to give a legal definition of the offence which he defined as being: 'A publ......
-
Craft v Boite
...to a libel, according to the distinction established by these authorities. 2 Or. M. & E. 156, Chalmers v. Payne. 5 Tyrw. 766, S. C. 6 M. & W. 105, Parmiter v. Coupland. 11 A. & E. 920, Baylis v. Lawrence. 3 Perr. & D. 526, S. C. See also 4 A. &E. 1016, Stockdale v. Tarte. The Judge may stat......
-
Never say 'never' for the truth can hurt: defamatory but true statements in the tort of simple conspiracy.
...(Lord Atkin). See also Consolidated Trust Co Ltd v Browne (1948) 49 SR (NSW) 86. (123) Parmiter v Coupland (1840) 6 M & W 105, 108; 151 ER 340, 341-2 (Parke B). (124) Youssoupoff v Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Pictures Lid (1934) 50 TLR 581,587 (Slesser LJ). (125) See Civil Law (Wrongs) Act 2002......
-
Defamation law and free speech: Reynolds v. Times Newspapers and the English media.
...University of Melbourne) (on file with the University of Melbourne Library). (67.) Parmiter v. Coupland, [1840] 6 M & W 105; 151 E.R. 340. (68.) Sim v. Stretch, [1936] 2 All E.R. 1237, (69.) Youssoupoff v. MGM Pictures, [1934] 50 T.L.R. 581, 587. (70.) GATLEY ON LIBEL AND SLANDER, supra......
-
Liability in Defamation and Negligence Following Breach of Bank Secrecy
...Secrecy and Confidentiality', 63 ALJ, Vol. 63, p. 416. (11) [1989] QB 728 at p. 740. (12) Parmiter v Coupland (1840) 6 M & W 105 at p. 108; 151 ER 340 at p. 342 per Parke B. (13) Mitchell, P. (1998) 'Malice in defamation' LQR, Vol. 114, p. 639. Malice — an intention to injure — was a factor......