Riddell v Glasgow Corporation
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 18 May 1910 |
| Date | 18 May 1910 |
| Docket Number | No. 102. |
| Court | Court of Session |
Lord Salvesen, Lord Low, Lord Ardwall, Lord Justice-Clerk, Lord Dundas.
Reparation—Slander—Master and Servant—Liability of Master for Slander uttered by Servant—Slander uttered in course of employment—Privilege—Malice—Sufficiency of averments of Malice.
In an action of damages for verbal slander against the Corporation of the City of Glasgow the pursuer averred that A, who was in the service of the defenders as a collector of assessments, called at her husband's house to collect the police assessment, which was payable in instalments; that she tendered the balance due, which A declined to accept as correct; that he asked to see, and was shewn, the receipts for previous payments; that he then left the house, but returned after some hours, when he charged her with having altered one of the receipts with the purpose of defrauding the Corporation; that the receipt bore no mark of having been altered; that when she denied the charge he used violent language, and assaulted her; that he thereafter repeated the slander in the house of a neighbour to which she had retreated, and later in the office of the collector of police assessments, to which she and a friend accompanied A.
Held (1) that the averments were relevant seeing that they sufficiently disclosed that the alleged slander was connected with and related to A's employment as a collector; (2) that (the occasion being privileged) they contained a sufficient statement of facts and circumstances from which malice might be inferred.
Mrs Riddell, wife of Nathaniel Riddell, steel-worker, 30 Sister Street, Calton, Glasgow, with the consent of her husband, raised an action of damages on the ground of slander against the Corporation of the City of Glasgow.
The pursuer averred;—(Cond. 2) ‘On or about 28th September 1909 the pursuer's husband, the said Nathaniel Riddell, was the tenant of the dwelling-house still occupied by him and the pursuer at 30 Sister Street aforesaid, of which the rental is £8, 4s. Police assessments were payable by pursuer's husband in respect of his tenancy and occupancy of said house amounting to 17s. 01/2d. In conformity with the practice in Glasgow said assessments were accepted by the defenders in instalments. At said date the following sums had been paid to account of the assessments due, viz.:—7s. 6d., 4s., 2s. 6d., and 2s., making in all 16s., leaving a balance of 1s. 01/2d. remaining due.’
(Cond. 3) ‘On said date Matthew Gilmour, 104 Cardross Street, Dennistoun, Glasgow, who was in the service of the defenders as a tax-collector, and whose duties included the collection of the police assessments payable by pursuer's husband, and the granting of receipts therefor and for instalments thereof, while in the exercise of his duty as police tax-collector in the employment of the defenders, called twice at pursuer's said house at 30 Sister Street aforesaid. On the first occasion the said Matthew Gilmour came to pursuer's said house and demanded payment of the police taxes. The said Nathaniel Riddell was absent at work, but the pursuer, the said Mrs Esther Lorimer or Riddell, who was alone in the house at the time, tendered to Gilmour the sum of 1s. 01/2d., being the balance due by her husband at that date for police taxes for the current year. Gilmour declined to accept said sum, and stated that the pursuer's husband was due to the defenders, the Corporation of Glasgow, in name of police taxes the sum of 4s. 01/2d. for said house at 30 Sister Street. Gilmour thereupon demanded production of all the receipts for police taxes for the current year in the possession of the pursuer, who immediately produced four receipts, being for the sum of 7s. 6d., 4s., 2s. 6d., and 2s., making a total of 16s., which she had on various dates paid to the collector Gilmour, as representing the Corporation of Glasgow, which clearly shewed that there only remained a balance of 1s. 01/2d. due to the Corporation, and handed the same to Gilmour for examination. Upon examining the said receipts Gilmour remarked that he would call again the same afternoon, and left pursuer's house.’
(Cond. 4) ‘About 3 p.m. on said date the said Matthew Gilmour again called at the pursuer's house at 30 Sister Street aforesaid, and again requested the pursuer, Mrs Esther Lorimer or Riddell, to produce to him the four receipts which she had exhibited to him on the morning of said date. The receipts were accordingly produced. Among these receipts was one for 7s. 6d. The said receipt presented no appearance of having been altered, but nevertheless the said Matthew Gilmour accused the pursuer of altering and forging the said receipt for 7s. 6d. from the sum of 4s. 6d. to 7s. 6d. for the purpose of defrauding the defenders of the sum of 3s. He further stated that he would lodge information with the police authorities, which would result in the pursuer, the said Mrs Esther Lorimer or Riddell, being put into jail for three months for forgery. Pursuer demanded that Gilmour should immediately hand her back the said receipt for 7s. 6d., fearing that Gilmour would destroy same, and she indignantly repudiated the suggestion that she had acted dishonestly, and she threatened to report Gilmour at the office of the defenders in Tobago Street, Glasgow, for his conduct. Gilmour thereupon violently caught hold of the pursuer, pulled and pushed her about, and attempted to forcibly take possession of the remaining receipts which she held in her hand. As pursuer endeavoured to retain possession of said receipts Gilmour caught hold of one or more of said receipts, and some were partly torn. Pursuer, fearing further violence at the hands of Gilmour, shouted loudly for help in the hope that some of the neighbours in the adjoining houses would come to her assistance. Gilmour becoming alarmed left pursuer's house...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Keppel Bus Company Ltd v Sa'ad bin Ahmad
-
Commissioner for Inland Revenue v Felix Schuh (SA) (Pty) Ltd
...Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1940) 63 CLR 382 (2 AITR 4 at 31; 5 ATD 298); Farmer v The Scottish North American Trust Ltd 1910 SC 693 (5 TC 693; J [1912] AC 118); Lombard Australia Ltd v Federal 1994 (2) SA p803 Commissioner of Taxation (1980) 10 ATR 743 (SC NSW) at 753 lines 28-......
-
Percy v Glasgow Corporation
...1910 S. C. 386; M'Cormack v. Glasgow Corporation, 1910 S. C. 562; Riddell v. Glasgow Corporation, 1911 S. C. (H. L.) 35, reversing 1910 S. C. 693. After considering the arguments in the light of the authorities, I have come to the conclusion that the case as now averred by the pursuer is re......
-
Aiken v Caledonian Railway Company
...Limited, 1908 S. C. 200, and Dinnie v. Hengler, 1910 S. C. 4, were also referred to. 7 1908 S. C. 928. 8 Riddell v. Glasgow Corporation, 1910 S. C. 693, per Lord Salvesen at p. 696. 9 [1904] A. C. 423. 10 (1905) 7 F. 629. 1 [1911] 2 K. B. 489, at p. 508. 2 Stuart v. BellELR, [1891] 2 Q. B. ......