Zenobio against Axtell. [in the COURT of KING'S BENCH.]
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 05 February 1795 |
| Date | 05 February 1795 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 101 E.R. 489
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
1 Saund. 242.
Referred to, Bradlaugh v. R., 1878, 3 Q. B. D. 631.
zenobio against axtell. Thursday, Feb. 5th, 1795. In an action for a libel written in a foreign language, the plaintiff must set forth the libel in the- original: and if he only set out a translation of it, the Court will arrest the judgment. [1 Saund. 242.] [Referred to, Bradlaugh v. B., 1878, 3 Q. B. D. 631.] This was an action for a libel. The declaration contained three counts; the defendant suffered judgment to go by default; and after the plaintiff had instituted a writ of inquiry, upon which the jury gave 1001. damages generally, the defendant moved in arrest of judgment, for the insufficiency of the third count, which was as-follows; that the defendant, envying the happy state and condition of the plaintiff, and further contriving and maliciously intending wrongfully and unjustly to injure and prejudice the plaintiff in his said good name, fame, credit, and reputation, and to bring him into public scandal, disesteem, and disgrace, on, &c. at, &c. falsely and maliciously, wilfully, wrongfully, and designedly, published and caused to be published a certain other false, scandalous, malicious, defamatory, and opprobrious libel, of and concerning the said plaintiff, in the French language, in a certain newspaper, commonly called and known by the name of Courier de Londres, and which said false, scandalous, malicious, defamatory, and opprobrious libel is according to the purport and effect following in the English language; that is to say, " The late famous Bishop of Autun, to the great satisfaction of all honest men, has just received an order to quit England r the same compliment has been paid to an adventurer, a great gambler, who calls himself the Count Zenobio;" by means of the publishing of which said false, &c. the plaintiff is greatly injured, &e. Wathen moved to arrest the judgment, on account of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Workers' Party v Tay Boon Too
...ER 1237; (1936) 52 TLR 669 (folld) Syed Husin Ali v Sharikat Penchetakan Utusan Melayu [1973] 2 MLJ 56 (refd) Zenobio v Axtell 6 TR 162; 101 ER 489 (refd) Defamation Act (Cap 32, 1970 Rev Ed) ss 5, 12, 13 (consd) J B Jeyaretnam (J B Jeyaretnam & Co) for the plaintiff G S Hill and P Selvadur......
-
Bernhardt v Abrahams
...Anderson v. HunterSC, (1891) 18 R. 467. 2 Martin v. M'LeanUNK, (1844) 6 D. 981. 3 The Lord President referred to Zenobio v. AxtellENR, (1795) 6 T. R. 162. 4 18 R. 5 Counsel referred to Friend v. SkeltonUNK, (1855) 17 D. 548, as an example of the minimum of evidence required. 1 6 D. 981. 2 1......
-
Holland against Brooks
...E.R. 489" class="content__heading content__heading--depth1"> English Reports Citation: 101 E.R. 489 IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.Holland against Brooks 7 T. R. 73. holland against bkooks. Thursday, Feb. 5th, 1795. A party cannot, in shewing cause against an attachment for not performing an ......