"FAIR COMMENT"

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 31, 29 April 1927, Page 1

"FAIR COMMENT"

LIBEL ACTION LOST AN ENGINEER’S CLAIM LETTERS IN NEWSPAPER Press Association CHRISTCHURCH, To-day. Cyrus J. R. Williams, engineer to the Lyttelton Harbour Board, lost the case in which he claimed £I,OOO from the Christchurch Press Company for alleged libel. He alleged that publication in the Christchurch “Press’' of letters purporting to be signed by the Port and City Committee had injured him professionally. Summing up. Mr. Justice Adams said the rules in regard to liability for libel differed where matters of public interest were discussed, and where no question of public interest arose. Every subject in the Empire, as well as every newspaper, had a right to criticise and comment on matters of public interest. In exercising that right the subject had a right to criticise and comment on the action of public servants acting in the same capacity as Mr. Williams. But criticism must be devoid of malice and must be honest. In the present case the defendant’s main contention was that it was not concerned with Mr. Williams, but with the board and with the board’s policy and the progress of the port and of the city. The jury must remember that it was dealing on the one hand with the interest of the public in regard to free discussion, and on tbe other hand with the right of a private person in those circumstances to claim damages if he was libelled. After a retirement of two hours the jury returned to ask His Honour whether, if the words complained of were fair comment, could they be considered defamatory. The judge replied that words that were fair comment could still be defamatory but not actionable. He indicated that if the jury were to find that the comment was fair it would be quite enough for the court. The jury returned after a further half-hour’s retirement with a finding in favour of the defendant. The jury disagreed on the question whether the words complained of were defamatory, but found that they were fair comment. Judgment was entered for defendant with costs.