Odger's English Common Law

TRADE DISPUTES ACT, 1906. 563
Act, 1906, 1 it is an actionable wrong for A. without lawful
justification by threats, intimidation or violence to prevent
B. from contracting with C. In such cases it is actionable
for A. and others unlawfully to conspire to prevent B. from
contracting with C. 2
By virtue of the Trade Disputes Act, 1906, 1 the law has
now been altered in the case of any act done "in contem-
plation or furtherance of a trade dispute." A trade dispute
is defined in the Act as " any dispute between employers and
workmen, or between workmen and workmen, which is con-
nected with the employment or non-employment or the terms
of the employment or with the conditions of labour of any
person." 3 The Act declares that " an act done by a person in
contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute shall not be
actionable on the ground only that it induces some other
person to break a contract of employment or that it is an
interference with the trade, business or employment of some
other person, or with the right of some other person to
dispose of his capital or his labour as he wills
" 4
; and further
that "an act done in pursuance of an agreement or com-
bination by two or more persons shall, if done in contempla-
tion or furtherance of a trade dispute, not be actionable
unless the act, if done without any such agreement or com-
bination, would be actionable." 5
Another illustration of the same principle is the action of
seduction, which is brought not for the wrongful or immoral
act of the defendant, but for the loss of the services of the
person seduced. It is—in theory, at all events—an action
brought by a master against a person who has wrongfully
deprived him of the services of his servant, and so occasioned
him loss or inconvenience. As a matter of fact, however,
the action is generally brought by a parent for the loss of the
services of his daughter. These may be of but little
pecuniary value to the parent, but the jury is allowed to
i 6 Edw. VII. c. 47.
- Quinn v. L-athem, [1901] A. C. 495; South Wales Miners Federation v.
Glamorgan Coal Co., [1905] A. 0. 239 ; Ghblan v. National Amalgamated Labourers'
Union, [1903] 2 K. B. 000.
3 6 Edw. VII. c. 47, s. 5 ; and see 9 & 10 Geo. V. c. 69, s. 8.
« S. 3.
5 S. 1.
36—2