Robinson against Marchant
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1845 |
| Date | 01 January 1845 |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 115 E.R. 733
QUEEN'S BENCH
S. C. 15 L. J. Q. B. 135; 10 Jur. 156.
[918] robinson against marghant. 1845. Declaration stated that plaintiff was a banker in partnership with A. and B., and that defendant falsely and maliciously spoke words of plaintiff, and of him in his said trade, imputing to him insolvency: by means whereof plaintiff was injured in his good name, and divers persons believed him to be indigent, and refused to deal with him in his said trade, and one C. withdrew his account from the bank of plaintiff and his aaid partners. Plea in abatement: that plaintiff carried on the aaid business jointly and un-dividedly with A. and B., and not otherwise, and that all the damage in the declaration mentioned accrued to A, and B. jointly with plaintiff, and not to him 734 ROBINSON V. MARCHANT 7 Q. B. 919. alone; and that, at the time of the commencement of the suit, A. and B. were living, &c. Held bad, because it was pleaded in terms to damage, and not to the cause of action, and the special damage to the partnership was not so essentially the cause of action that without it the action could not have been maintained. Qusro, whether the declaration would have been bad on special demurrer, for blending a cause of action vested in the plaintiff singly with a cause common to the partners. [S, C. 15 L. J. Q. B. 135 ; 10 Jur. 156.] Case for words. The declaration stated that "the plaintiff, before and at the time of the committing," &c., "was, and from thence hitherto hath been, and still is, a banker, and hath, for several years, exercised and carried on, and still doth exercise and carry on, together, and in copartnership, with one John William Sutherland and George Cbasemore, the trade and business of a banker, with integrity," &c., and thereby not only obtained the good opinion, &e., but was acquiring great gains and profits in his said trade, &c.; and that, " before the committing," &c., " one Charles Smith and divers other persons banked with the plaintiff and his said partners, and were in the habit of entrusting the plaintiff and his said partners with divers large sums of money ; and, at the time of the committing," &c., "had entrusted the plaintiff and his said partners with divers large sums of money, whereby and by means whereof he the said plaintiff and his said partners obtaitied great gains and profits. Yet the defendant, greatly envying," &c., "and contriving," &c. "to injure the plaintiff in his good name," &c., "and to bring him into great scandal," &c., "and to cause it to be suspected that the plaintiff was poor and in indigent circumstances, and [919] thereby and otherwise to injure the credit of the plaintiff in his aforesaid trade and business and otherwise, and to deprive him of the benefit of the said gains and profits accruing to him from the said sums of money so entrusted to him and his said partners as aforesaid," &c., heretofore, to wit, &c., " in a certain discourse which the defendant then had of and concerning the plaintiff, and of and concerning him in his aforesaid trade and business, falsely and maliciously spoke and published, in the presence and hearing of the said Charles Smith and divers other persons, of and concerning the plaintiff, and of and concerning him in the way of his aforesaid trade arid business, the false," &c. "and defamatory words following, viz.," &c. The words (set out with proper innuendoes) were : If Robinson was put up with his liabilities, I would not give 50s. for him. You do not know all I can prove. He is not worth 50s. after paying all he owes...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Joseph Le Fanu, and Edward Bull, - Plaintiffs in Error; Joseph Malcomson and Others, - Defendants in Error
...S.C. 8 Ir. L.R. 418; 13 L.T. O.S. 61. As to actions by partners, see Haythorn v. Lawson, 1827, 3 C. and P. 196; Robinson v. Marchant, 1845, 7 Q.B. 918; R.S.C. 1883, Ord. 16, r. 1; Ord. 18, r. 6. As to application of general words to individual, see White v. Mellin (1895), A.C. 154. Libel - ......