AB v. XY [1916] ScotCS CSIH_2 (26 October 1916)

AB v. XY [1916] ScotCS CSIH_2 (26 October 1916)

Both occasions were privileged; the defender's statements were made in the conduct of his own affairs and in discharge of duty. The pursuers failed to aver relevant malice, as the facts and language used were consistent with honest belief and not reckless or unreasonable. No antecedent ill-will or extrinsic evidence of malice was shown.

Citation
[1916] ScotCS CSIH_2
Parties
Pursuer: A B; Defender: X Y
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
26 October 1916
Procedural Posture
Delict / Appeal
Outcome
actions dismissed
Legal Topics
Qualified Privilege, Malice, Dismissal of Employees, Communication to Staff
Defamation Privilege Qualified Privilege Malice Dismissal of Employees Communication to Staff

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A B

Pursuer

X Y

Defender

Procedural Posture

Delict / Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defender's statements on the second occasion were protected by privilege
  2. 2 Whether the pursuers' averments of malice were relevant

Ratio Decidendi

Both occasions were privileged; the defender's statements were made in the conduct of his own affairs and in discharge of duty. The pursuers failed to aver relevant malice, as the facts and language used were consistent with honest belief and not reckless or unreasonable. No antecedent ill-will or extrinsic evidence of malice was shown.

Court Disposition

actions dismissed

Orders

  • Recall the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor
  • Sustain the first plea in law for the defender in each case