Bernhardt v. Abrahams [1912] ScotLR 574 (19 March 1912)
The pursuer failed to prove that the slanderous words alleged in English were spoken, as the words were in Yiddish and not set forth or proved as required; further, the innuendo in the private letter was not proved as none of the recipients testified to understanding the defamatory meaning alleged.
- Citation
- [1912] ScotLR 574
- Parties
- Pursuer: William Bernhardt; Defender: Benjamin Abrahams (P. Abrahams & Company)
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 19 March 1912
- Procedural Posture
- Reparation (damages for Slander) / Appeal From Jury Verdict; Motion for New Trial
- Outcome
- Verdict set aside; new trial granted.
- Legal Topics
- Slander, Innuendo, Foreign Language Evidence, Proof Requirements, Damages
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
William Bernhardt
Pursuer
Benjamin Abrahams (P. Abrahams & Company)
Defender
Procedural Posture
Reparation (damages for Slander) / Appeal From Jury Verdict; Motion for New Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether slanderous words alleged in English but spoken in Yiddish can support a verdict when not set forth in the record as spoken in Yiddish and not proved as such.
- 2 Whether, in a private letter alleged to be slanderous, the innuendo must be proved by showing recipients understood the defamatory meaning.
Ratio Decidendi
The pursuer failed to prove that the slanderous words alleged in English were spoken, as the words were in Yiddish and not set forth or proved as required; further, the innuendo in the private letter was not proved as none of the recipients testified to understanding the defamatory meaning alleged.
Court Disposition
Verdict set aside; new trial granted.
Orders
- Rule made absolute.
- Verdict set aside.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment