Ogston & Tennant, Ltd v. The Daily Record, Glasgow, Ltd [1909] ScotLR 703 (13 May 1909)

Ogston & Tennant, Ltd v. The Daily Record, Glasgow, Ltd [1909] ScotLR 703 (13 May 1909)

Pursuers are entitled to diligence to recover original letters or communications specifically referred to in the articles complained of, even if the author is anonymous or pseudonymous, as these are material to the issue of truth or falsity and the defence of fair comment. However, diligence for all other communications, or for all communications tending to show truth or bona fides where no specific communication is referenced, is too wide, unworkable, and not material, and is therefore refused.

Citation
[1909] ScotLR 703
Parties
Pursuer: Ogston & Tennant, Limited; Defender: The Daily Record, Glasgow, Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
13 May 1909
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Diligence (disclosure) Prior to Jury Trial
Outcome
partially allowed
Legal Topics
Slander, Defamation, Fair Comment, Disclosure of Documents, Diligence, Reparation
Tort Media Law Civil Procedure Slander Defamation Fair Comment Disclosure of Documents Diligence +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ogston & Tennant, Limited

Pursuer

The Daily Record, Glasgow, Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Diligence (disclosure) Prior to Jury Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether pursuers are entitled to diligence to recover letters and communications referred to in allegedly defamatory newspaper articles and letters, including anonymous letters and all communications tending to show truth or untruth of statements published and defenders' bona fides.

Ratio Decidendi

Pursuers are entitled to diligence to recover original letters or communications specifically referred to in the articles complained of, even if the author is anonymous or pseudonymous, as these are material to the issue of truth or falsity and the defence of fair comment. However, diligence for all other communications, or for all communications tending to show truth or bona fides where no specific communication is referenced, is too wide, unworkable, and not material, and is therefore refused.

Court Disposition

partially allowed

Orders

  • Lord Ordinary's interlocutor recalled.
  • Articles 2 and 3 of the specification disallowed.