High Court of Australia
744 HIGH COURT
H.C. oF A. tion of the language of the Schedule itself, that is by hol
1905. it is not within the words " goods not otherwise enume
Cuma because it is not ejusdem generis with the things
Sure Co. immediatel ly before. Upon that point I agree with the
2 Court.
MELBOURNE pee 4 Harpour For these reasons I am of opinion that the appeal fails. ae Even if the evidence had not been so clear as I th
STONERS.
Grimith C.J. ponderance of evidence in the appellant's favour to indue reverse a judgment of the Full Court in which they supported the judgment of the Judge of first instance question of fact. For these reasons the appeal will be dismis
Barton J. Iam entirely of the same opinion. O'Coxnor J. Tam also of the same opinion. Appeal dismissed with costs.
Solicitors, for appellant, Braham & Pirani. Solicitors, for respondents, Mulleson, England & Stewart. —
(HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.]
CROWLEY . 7 ; ; ' . APPELLANT; DEFENDANT, AND GLISSAN.. , ' 5 4 . Respondent (No PLAINTIFF, ; H.C. or A. ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF 1905. NEW SOUTH WALES.
Sypyey, 4¢tion for malicious prosecution—Onus on plaintiff —Absence of
Sept. 4, 5, 6, probable cause—Lvidence of plaintiff not inconsistent with reasonable
Tab guilt—Nonsuit. Libel—Criminal offence—Defence of truth and publication for public be Gritmeh OJ. and manner of publication to be considered—Motive of libeller it
O'Connor JJ. Defamation Act (N.S.W.) (No, 22 of 1902), secs. 12 and 13.
OF AUSTRALIA.
\blish the absence of reasonable and probable cause, must prove that known to the defendant, at the time when he initiated the prosecu- 'were inconsistent with an honest belief upon reasonable grounds that ntiff could not establish a defence to the charge.
12of the Defamation Act (N.S. WV.) (No. 22 of 1901) makes it a criminal ffence to maliciously publish a defamatory libel. Sec. 13 provides that on trial of an indictment or information for such a libel, the truth of the lefamatory matter may be inquired into, but shall not amount toa defence a was for the public benefit that the defamatory matter should be ablished. Such a defence must be specially pleaded.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate