Gallagher v Tuohy
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1924 |
| Date | 01 January 1924 |
| Court | Chancery Division (Irish Free State) |
Ch. Div., I. F. S.,
Gallagher
and
Tuohy
Libel - Interlocutory injunction - Jurisdiction - Plea of justification.
An interlocutory injunction was sought to restrain the publication of an alleged libel, pending the trial of the action. The defendants pleaded justification and swore that they would be able to justify the libel:—Held following Bonnard v. PerrymanELR, [1891] 2 Ch.269, that when a defendant takes upon himself the onus of justification and the Court is not satisfied that he may not be able to justify the libel, an interlocutory injunction ought not to be granted.
To continue reading
Request your trial
5 cases
-
Reynolds v Malocco
...BONNARD V PERRYMAN 1891 2 CH 269 EUROPEAN CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS & FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS ART 10 GALLAGHER V TUOHY 1924 58 ILTR 134 CULLEN V STANLEY 1926 IR 73 R V BISHOP 1975 1 QB 274 CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT 1898 S1(f)(II) SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 1967 S1(1) (UK) Synopsis Da......
-
Tansey -v- Gill and Others
...RSC O.11 r1 DEFAMATION ACT 2009 S11(2) DEFAMATION ACT 2009 S33 REYNOLDS v MALOCCO 1999 2 IR 203 ELR 274 2002 GALLAGHER v TUOHY 1924 58 ILTR 134 CULLEN v STANLEY 1926 IR 73 DEFAMATION ACT 2009 S33(1) DEFAMATION Interlocutory injunction Publication on internet - Defence of justification - ......
-
Mercury Engineering and Others v McCool Controls & Engineering Ltd
...LTD UNREP KELLY 28.1.2005 2005/26/5290 2005 IEHC 14 BONNARD v PERRYMAN 1891 2 CH 269 COULSON v COULSON 1887 3 TLR 846 GALLAGHER v TUOHY 1924 58 ILTR 134 CULLEN v STANLEY 1926 IR 73 EUROPE CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS & FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS ART 10.1 COLLINS LAW OF DEFAMATION & INTERNET 2ED 201......
-
Beaumont Hospital Board and Another v O'Doherty
...in this jurisdiction as to the proper approach to take on this topic. On the one hand there is the decision in Gallagher v Tuohy (1924) 58 I.L.T.R. 134, where the matter complained of consisted of a circular containing defamatory statements concerning the plaintiff in his business capacity.......
Request a trial to view additional results