Bryant v. Edgar [1909] ScotLR 802 (02 June 1909)

Bryant v. Edgar [1909] ScotLR 802 (02 June 1909)

In the special circumstances, the circular letter, sent to fifty managers and containing statements that the pursuer was dismissed for inattention and neglect, could be construed as a serious imputation on his business character, justifying an issue for jury determination. As the communication was privileged, malice must be included in the issue.

Citation
[1909] ScotLR 802
Parties
Pursuer: Jesse Harold Bryant; Defender: Edgar Samuel Edgar
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
02 June 1909
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary's Dismissal
Outcome
interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled; issue allowed to jury
Legal Topics
Slander, Defamation, Qualified Privilege, Malice, Employment Dismissal
Tort Employment Law Slander Defamation Qualified Privilege Malice Employment Dismissal

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jesse Harold Bryant

Pursuer

Edgar Samuel Edgar

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary's Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a circular letter from employer to other managers, stating reasons for dismissal of an employee, is actionable as slander under Scots law
  2. 2 Whether the statements in the letter amount to a defamatory imputation on the pursuer's business character or competence
  3. 3 Whether the communication was privileged and, if so, whether malice was sufficiently averred to defeat privilege

Ratio Decidendi

In the special circumstances, the circular letter, sent to fifty managers and containing statements that the pursuer was dismissed for inattention and neglect, could be construed as a serious imputation on his business character, justifying an issue for jury determination. As the communication was privileged, malice must be included in the issue.

Court Disposition

interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled; issue allowed to jury

Orders

  • Approved issue for jury: Whether the defender's letter falsely, calumniously, and maliciously represented that the pursuer had been guilty of such inattention and neglect of defender's interests as manager that the defender had been compelled to dismiss him, to the pursuer's loss, injury, and damage.