Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
The sheriff, having resumed consideration of the cause, repels the pleas-in-law for the pursuer; sustains the second plea-in-law for the defender; and absolves the pursuer from the first crave of the writ.
[1] In this case, the pursuer seeks an award of damages on the grounds of his having been defamed by the defender. The defender denies defamation.
[2] I heard evidence and submissions on 23 August, 5 September and 3 October, all 2012 from thirteen witness, namely: the pursuer; David Colman, Paul Young, Jonathon Matheson-Dear, John Yorkston, Brian Miller, Ron Shepherd, Hendrick John, JP, and Graham Primrose, all former members, along with the pursuer and defender of the LBD Business Club; Charles Lawrie, a friend (or former friend) of the pursuer and defender; the defender; his wife, Mrs Lindsay Bennett; and Jenny McFarland, an employee of the defender. I was also referred to some documentary productions.
[3] In the course of submissions, I was referred to the following authorities: RAH v MH [2012] CSOH 126; Munro v Brown [2011] CSOH 117 ; McLeod v Newsquest (Sunday Herald) Ltd 2007 Rep.L.R.5 and Prophit v British Broadcasting Corporation 1997 SLT 745.
[4] Having heard the evidence and submissions, I found the following facts to be admitted or proved.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.