Campbell John Ritchie & Co.. v. Hay John Ritchie & Co. [1907] ScotLR 766 (22 June 1907)

Campbell John Ritchie & Co.. v. Hay John Ritchie & Co. [1907] ScotLR 766 (22 June 1907)

The article, when read as a whole, did not charge the pursuers with theft but used the word 'thieves' in an exaggerated or abusive sense directed at a class (bird-limers). The facts of the conviction were accurately reported, and no reasonable reader could conclude that the pursuers were accused of theft. Therefore, the innuendo fails and the action is not maintainable.

Citation
[1907] ScotLR 766
Parties
Pursuer: George Campbell; Pursuer: Robert Hay; Defender: John Ritchie & Company
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
22 June 1907
Procedural Posture
Civil / Reclaiming Note (appeal) Against Lord Ordinary's Approval of Issues for Jury Trial
Outcome
action dismissed
Legal Topics
Slander, Libel, Innuendo, Fair Comment, Class Defamation, Expenses
Defamation Media Law Tort Slander Libel Innuendo Fair Comment Class Defamation +1 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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George Campbell

Pursuer

Robert Hay

Pursuer

John Ritchie & Company

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Reclaiming Note (appeal) Against Lord Ordinary's Approval of Issues for Jury Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the newspaper article could reasonably be interpreted as charging the pursuers with the crime of theft
  2. 2 Whether the use of the word 'thieves' in the article constituted actionable slander against the pursuers as individuals
  3. 3 Whether exaggerated or abusive language directed at a class can found an action for slander by an individual

Ratio Decidendi

The article, when read as a whole, did not charge the pursuers with theft but used the word 'thieves' in an exaggerated or abusive sense directed at a class (bird-limers). The facts of the conviction were accurately reported, and no reasonable reader could conclude that the pursuers were accused of theft. Therefore, the innuendo fails and the action is not maintainable.

Court Disposition

action dismissed

Orders

  • issues disallowed
  • action dismissed