Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
Scottish Court of Session Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> Inglis v. Inglis (ante, p. 183.) [1866] ScotLR 1_252 (29 March 1866)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1866/01SLR0252.html
Cite as: [1866] ScotLR 1_252, [1866] SLR 1_252
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
SCOTTISH_SLR_Court_of_Session
Page: 252↓
Court of Session Inner House Second Division.
v.
Facts:
In an action of damages for written slander—verdict for the defender.
The pursuer in this action is William Allan Inglis, flour merchant in Musselburgh, and the defender is John Inglis, flour merchant, Steam Mills there; and the issue sent to trial is as follows:—
“Whether the defender, in or about July 1865, wrote and circulated among the pursuer's customers a letter in the terms set forth in the schedule hereunto annexed? And whether the said letter is of and concerning the pursuer, and falsely and calumniously represents that the pursuer, having without right or title obtained a number of the defender's empty sacks, dishonestly retained said sacks, and dishonestly refused to give them up to the defender—to the loss, injury, and damage of the pursuer?”
Damages laid at £500.
schedule.
Letter referred to in the preceding issue.
“Steam Mills, Musselburgh, July 1865.
Dear Sir,—William A. Inglis, who recently acted as agent for the sale of my flour in your district, intimates
Page: 253↓
to me that he has got a number of my empty sacks into his possession, for which he demands payment, or as many of his sacks in lieu thereof. Presuming that these sacks must have come into his hands by some irregularity of some of my customers, I now beg to request you to be careful, when returning my sacks, to put on the full name and address, John Inglis, Steam Mills, Musselburgh. Should you not be careful on this point, it may lead to trouble in settling up.—Yours truly, (Signed) John Inglis, p. Rob. Lambert.”
The Lord Justice-Clerk, in summing up, observed that although the words of the circular complained of might appear innocent in themselves, still if the jury were convinced that they contained any hidden meaning by which the character of the pursuer had been injured, they were entitled to bring in a verdict in his favour. But they must also consider, in coming to the conclusion whether such a hidden meaning existed, whether the terms complained of were not precisely those which had been used by the pursuer himself in his correspondence with the defender.
The jury unanimously returned a verdict for the defender.
Counsel for Pursuer— Mr E. S. Gordon and Mr A. B. Shand. Agent— Mr J. Renton, Jun., S.S.C.
Counsel for Defender—The Solicitor-General, Mr Clark, and Mr J. T. Anderson. Agents— Messrs White-Millar & Robson, S.S.C.