Smith's Weekly Publishing Company Limited v Myerson [1924] HCA 7

34 C.L.B.] OF AUSTRALIA. 14t

(HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.

SMITH'S WEEKLY PUBLISHING COMPANY )

LIMITED 5 ss aibenda ate APPLICANT ; DEFENDANT, AND MYERSON. : 3 3 : : ' . Respondent. PLAINTIFF,

Practice—High Court—Appeal from Supreme Court of State—Leave to appeal—Prior 14. C, ov A. application to Supreme Court for leave to appeal to Privy Council—Order in Council of 2nd April 1909 (Imp.), r. 2.

1924.

In an action for libel in the Supreme Court of New South Wales a verdict had been given for the defendant which, on appeal by the plaintiff, hadas to ~ """ one count been set aside and a new trial ordered. The defendant applied to Knox C.J.,

the Supreme Court, under rule 2 of the Order in Council of 2nd April 1909, for gayen 'Dusty leave to appeal to the Privy Council, but leave was refused. and Starke JJ

Held, that leave to appeal to the High Court from the order of the Supreme Court directing a new trial should be refused.

Leave and special leave to appeal from the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Full Court): Myerson v. Smith's Weekly Publishing Co. Ltd. (No. 2}, (1923) 24 8.R. (N.S.W.) 51, refused.

Appiication for leave to appeal from the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

An action was brought in the Supreme Court by Emanuel Myerson against Smith's Weekly Publishing Co. Ltd. for libel in respect of matter published in the defendant's newspaper. The declaration contained four counts, and the jury found a verdict for the defendant

H. C. or A. 1924.

~ Sarr's WEEKLY

PUBLISHING Co. Lrp.

HIGH COURT (loz,

on each count. One of the defendant's pleas (the fifth) to the first count was that the statements complained of were true, and that their publication was for the public benefit. On appeal by the plaintiff the Full Court granted a new trial on the first count and upheld the verdict of the jury on the other three counts, and ordered the fifth plea to be struck out: Myerson v. Smith's Weekly Publishing Co. Ltd. (1). The defendant thereupon applied to the Full Court, pursuant to rule 2 of the Imperial Order in Council of 2nd April 1909, for leave to appeal to the Privy Council, on the ground that the questions involved in the proposed appeal were of great general and public importance and ought to be submitted to the Privy Council for decision. The Full Court dismissed that application: Myerson v. Smith's Weekly Publishing Co. Ltd. {No. 2] (2). :