02.04.2013 Views

Odger's English Common Law

Odger's English Common Law

Odger's English Common Law

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

MALICE. 537<br />

meeting bond fide and lawfully held for a lawful purpose<br />

and for the furtherance or discussion of any matter of public<br />

concern, whether the admission thereto be general or<br />

restricted."<br />

It will be observed that the privilege conferred by this<br />

section is confined to reports "published in a newspaper ; " *<br />

all reports not "published in a newspaper" remain unprivi-<br />

leged. And the section still leaves it the duty of the<br />

editor to edit all reports of public meetings, and excise any<br />

matter that is "not of public concern, and the publication<br />

of which is not for the public benefit." 2<br />

Malice.<br />

The defence that. the occasion of publication was one of<br />

qualified privilege may be rebutted by proof of actual malice<br />

in the defendant. Directly the judge rules that the occasion<br />

is privileged, the plaintiff must prove malice, or fail in his<br />

action. If, however, the judge rules that the occasion is not<br />

privileged, it is immaterial, except perhaps as to damages,<br />

whether the defendant acted maliciously or not.<br />

" Malice does not mean malice in law, a term in pleading, but actual<br />

malice, ... a wrong feeling in a man's mind. The defendant is not<br />

entitled to protection if he uses the occasion for some indirect and wrong<br />

motive. ... If a man is proved to have stated that which he knew to<br />

be false, no one need inquire further. ... So if it be proved that out of<br />

anger or for some other wrong motive the defendant has stated as true<br />

that which he does not know to be true, and he has stated it whether it is<br />

true or not, recklessly, by reason of his anger or other motive, the jury<br />

may infer that he used the occasion, not for the reason which justifies it,<br />

but for the gratification of his anger or other indirect motive." 3<br />

The existence of malice may be satisfactorily established<br />

in a great variety of ways. Thus proof that the defendant<br />

had previously libelled the plaintiff would be evidence to<br />

show that the defendant was actuated by malice in the par-<br />

ticular publication complained of, and that it did not<br />

take place through carelessness or inadvertence. Again,<br />

1 The precise meaning of the word " newspaper " is defined by s. 1 of the News-<br />

paper Libel and Registration Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 60, s. 2).<br />

2 See Kelly v. O'Malley (1889), C Times L. R. 62 ; and Chaloner v. Lansdoum<br />

and Smm (1894), 10 Times L. R. 290.<br />

8 Per Brett, L. J., in Clark v. Molyneua (1877), 3 Q. B. D. at pp. 246, 247.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!