Reader's Digest Services Pty Ltd v Lamb [1982] HCA 4

High Court of Australia Gibbs, C.J. Stephen, Murphy, Wilson and Brennan JJ. Reader's Digest Services Pty Ltd v Lamb [1982] HCA 4

ORDER Appeal dismissed with costs.

Cur. adv. vult.

The following written judgments were delivered:—

1982, Feb. 9 Gibbs C.J.

I would dismiss this appeal for the reasons given by my brother Brennan which I have had the advantage of reading and with which I agree.

Stephen J.

I agree with the judgment of Brennan J. and with the order which he proposes.

Murphy J.

I agree generally with Brennan J. However, where a jury is the tribunal of fact and the issue of libel or no libel depends on the natural and ordinary meaning of the words, reference to hypothetical referees is not called for. The jury are there as referees to decide whether they would understand the words in defamatory sense. The jury stand for the community, it is their opinion which is decisive, not, despite what has been said in some cases, their estimate of what "reasonable" or "right-thinking members of society generally" (whatever that means) or "ordinary men not avid for scandal" would think.

The appeal should be dismissed.

Wilson J.

I would dismiss this appeal, for the reasons given by Brennan J.

Brennan J.

In the Supreme Court of New South Wales the respondent, an English journalist, recovered a judgment against the appellants for damages for defamation. The first appellant had published a book, Great Cases of Scotland Yard — Volume I, which included a chapter of which the second appellant was the author and which contained the matter complained of. The chapter was entitled "The Stealing of Mrs. Muriel McKay" and concerned the tragic abduction of Mrs. McKay and her subsequent murder in London. The relevant passage purported to describe a conversation between two police officers in the McKay home after Mrs. McKay had been abducted: