Defamation

Craig Moore v. The Scottish Daily Record and Sunday Mail Limited [2008] CSIH 50

Thu, 07 Aug 2008 16:46:00 GMT

Reclaiming Motion:- Here the pursuer and respondent sought damages from the defenders and reclaimers in respect of defamation of him by them alleged to have occurred in material published on 4 January 2005. Following a procedure roll debate, the Lord Ordinary made no order in hoc statu in the action. The defenders and reclaimers submitted that the Lord Ordinary had erred in refusing to dismiss the action, as they had sought. At the start of the hearing, it was indicated by counsel for the pursuer and respondent that the case had been settled. It was accepted that it was unfortunate that the court's time had been wasted by the late settlement. The court considered whether the court had the power to make an order such as that made in John Billig & Another v The Council of the Law Society of Scotland, [2007] CSIH 86, where, in response to the waste of the court's time occasioned by the late settlement of the action, the petitioners had been made liable to the Scottish Court Service for the daily court fees which would have been due had the reserved diet not been aborted.

AppA UK Limited & Graham Hutchison v. The Scottish Daily Record and Sunday Mail Limited [2007] CSOH 196

Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:45:00 GMT

Expenses:- These two actions related to an issue of the Daily Record published on 29 November 2005 that carried articles relating to Mr. Hutchinson and AppA. The articles were critical of the methods by which they sold therapeutic beds to elderly customers. Here the pursuers lodged, in each action, a minute of abandonment. In each case the defenders lodged a motion for expenses and an additional fee. The motion stated inter alia:- "On behalf of the defenders, in respect of the pursuer's abandonment of the action, in respect of the contingency between the present action and the associated action at the instance of Graham Hutchison, and further in respect of the conduct of the pursuers and Mr Hutchison between the raising of the action and said abandonment, to find the pursuers jointly and severally liable with the said Graham Hutchison to the defenders in the expenses of the action on the basis of agent/client, client paying; which failing agent/client, third party paying; .." Here the court considered the pursuers' conduct of the litigations.

Ian Kennedy v. John Aldington and Others

Fri, 06 May 2005 00:00:00 GMT

Defamation/Forum Non Conveniens:

Westcrowns Contracting Services Limited v. Daylight Insulation Limited

Tue, 26 Apr 2005 00:00:00 GMT

Petition for Interdict/Defamation: