Crowley v Glissan (No 2) [1905] HCA 31

Crowley v Glissan (No 2) [1905] HCA 31

Where the facts as known to the prosecutor at the time were consistent with an honest belief on reasonable grounds in the accused's guilt, the plaintiff in a malicious prosecution action fails to establish want of reasonable and probable cause. Evidence was insufficient to show that appellant could not reasonably and honestly believe respondent could not establish a defence to the libel charge, so the plaintiff should have been nonsuited.

Parties
Appellant: Crowley; Respondent: Glissan
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 September 1905
Procedural Posture
Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of New South Wales
Outcome
Appeal allowed; plaintiff to be nonsuited.
Legal Topics
Malicious Prosecution, Defamation, Criminal Libel, Onus of Proof, Reasonable and Probable Cause, Justification, Public Benefit, Pleading and Procedure
Torts Criminal Law Malicious Prosecution Defamation Criminal Libel Onus of Proof Reasonable and Probable Cause Justification +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Crowley

Appellant

Glissan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / On Appeal From the Supreme Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff established absence of reasonable and probable cause for the prosecution for criminal libel
  2. 2 Whether evidence of truth and public benefit was admissible in the action for malicious prosecution
  3. 3 Meaning and application of statutory defences under the Defamation Act (N.S.W.) (No. 22 of 1901), secs. 12 and 13

Ratio Decidendi

Where the facts as known to the prosecutor at the time were consistent with an honest belief on reasonable grounds in the accused's guilt, the plaintiff in a malicious prosecution action fails to establish want of reasonable and probable cause. Evidence was insufficient to show that appellant could not reasonably and honestly believe respondent could not establish a defence to the libel charge, so the plaintiff should have been nonsuited.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; plaintiff to be nonsuited.

Orders

  • Order appealed from discharged with costs.
  • Rule made absolute for a nonsuit.