Keith v. Lauder [1905] ScotLR 43_230 (23 December 1905)

Keith v. Lauder [1905] ScotLR 43_230 (23 December 1905)

The defender's report was privileged as it was made in pursuit of a legitimate interest among association members, and there was no evidence of malice or lack of reasonable grounds for the statements. The pursuer failed to prove malice or that the statements were false or recklessly made.

Citation
[1905] ScotLR 43_230
Parties
Pursuer: George Keith; Defender: Thomas Lauder
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
23 December 1905
Procedural Posture
Reparation (slander) / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session Inner House
Outcome
appeal sustained; defender assoilzied (absolved)
Legal Topics
Slander, Privilege, Malice, Employment Termination, Trade Reputation

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 3 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George Keith

Pursuer

Thomas Lauder

Defender

Procedural Posture

Reparation (slander) / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session Inner House

  1. 1 Whether the defender's report to the Owners' Association was privileged
  2. 2 Whether the defender acted with malice in reporting the pursuer
  3. 3 Whether the pursuer was entitled to damages for slander and loss of employment

Ratio Decidendi

The defender's report was privileged as it was made in pursuit of a legitimate interest among association members, and there was no evidence of malice or lack of reasonable grounds for the statements. The pursuer failed to prove malice or that the statements were false or recklessly made.

Court Disposition

appeal sustained; defender assoilzied (absolved)

Orders

  • Recall the Sheriff-Substitute's interlocutor
  • Assoilzie the defender from the conclusions of the action