Robertson v. Newquest (Sunday Herald) Ltd & Ors [2006] ScotCS CSOH_97 (28 June 2006)

Robertson v. Newquest (Sunday Herald) Ltd & Ors [2006] ScotCS CSOH_97 (28 June 2006)

The article, when read as a whole, was not capable of bearing the defamatory meaning alleged by the pursuer. It did not repeat or give currency to the allegation that the pursuer was responsible for the Dunblane massacre, nor did it portray him as irrational, bullying, or as raising spurious proceedings. The defenders' preliminary plea was sustained and the action dismissed.

Citation
[2006] ScotCS CSOH_97
Parties
Pursuer: George Islay McNeill Robertson, Lord Robertson of Port Ellen; First Defender: Newsquest (Sunday Herald) Ltd; Second Defender: Andrew Jaspan (Editor); Third Defender: Unnamed Journalist (Sunday Herald)
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
28 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil (defamation) / Debate on Relevancy and Specification (preliminary Plea)
Outcome
Action dismissed (defenders' preliminary plea sustained)
Legal Topics
Defamatory Meaning, Repetition Rule, Bane and Antidote, Innocent Dissemination, Online Publication Liability
Defamation Media Law Tort Defamatory Meaning Repetition Rule Bane and Antidote Innocent Dissemination Online Publication Liability

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George Islay McNeill Robertson, Lord Robertson of Port Ellen

Pursuer

Newsquest (Sunday Herald) Ltd

First Defender

Andrew Jaspan (Editor)

Second Defender

Unnamed Journalist (Sunday Herald)

Third Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil (defamation) / Debate on Relevancy and Specification (preliminary Plea)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the words complained of were capable of bearing the defamatory meaning averred by the pursuer
  2. 2 Whether the article repeated or gave currency to the allegation that the pursuer was responsible for the Dunblane massacre
  3. 3 Whether the article portrayed the pursuer as irrational, bullying, or as raising spurious proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The article, when read as a whole, was not capable of bearing the defamatory meaning alleged by the pursuer. It did not repeat or give currency to the allegation that the pursuer was responsible for the Dunblane massacre, nor did it portray him as irrational, bullying, or as raising spurious proceedings. The defenders' preliminary plea was sustained and the action dismissed.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed (defenders' preliminary plea sustained)

Orders

  • Action dismissed