Corrigan v. Monaghan [1922] ScotLR 68 (24 October 1922)

Corrigan v. Monaghan [1922] ScotLR 68 (24 October 1922)

A general averment that the pursuer is well known as a person of loose and immoral character is relevant and admissible in mitigation of damages in a slander action, but averments of specific acts of adultery are irrelevant and must be deleted from the record. However, fair notice of such specific acts entitles the defender to cross-examine the pursuer on them, though not to lead substantive evidence of their truth.

Citation
[1922] ScotLR 68
Parties
Pursuer: Mrs Annie Dougan or Corrigan; Defender: William Monaghan
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
24 October 1922
Procedural Posture
Reparation (damages for Slander) / Interlocutory Appeal (reclaiming Note) on Relevancy of Averments and Amendment
Outcome
interlocutor recalled; amendment allowed; specific averments deleted; general averment admitted; issue for pursuer approved
Legal Topics
Slander, Mitigation of Damages, Admissibility of Evidence, Character Evidence
Tort Defamation Slander Mitigation of Damages Admissibility of Evidence Character Evidence

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Annie Dougan or Corrigan

Pursuer

William Monaghan

Defender

Procedural Posture

Reparation (damages for Slander) / Interlocutory Appeal (reclaiming Note) on Relevancy of Averments and Amendment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether averments of specific acts of adultery by the pursuer are relevant and admissible in mitigation of damages in a slander action.
  2. 2 Whether a general averment of bad character is relevant and admissible in mitigation of damages.
  3. 3 Whether fair notice entitles cross-examination on specific instances of conduct.

Ratio Decidendi

A general averment that the pursuer is well known as a person of loose and immoral character is relevant and admissible in mitigation of damages in a slander action, but averments of specific acts of adultery are irrelevant and must be deleted from the record. However, fair notice of such specific acts entitles the defender to cross-examine the pursuer on them, though not to lead substantive evidence of their truth.

Court Disposition

interlocutor recalled; amendment allowed; specific averments deleted; general averment admitted; issue for pursuer approved

Orders

  • Amendment to record allowed to include general averment of bad character and lack of damage.
  • Averments of specific acts of adultery ordered to be deleted from the record.