Lefroy v Burnside

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 12 February 1879
• Court: Queen's Bench Division (Ireland)
• Date: 12 February 1879

Ex. Div.

LEFROY

and

BURNSIDE.

Dixon v. EnochELR L. R. 13 Eq. 394.

Ramsden v. Brearley W. N., 1875, 199.

Fisher v. Owen 8 Ch. Div. 645.

Allhusen v. LabouchereELR 3 Q. B. Div. 654.

Tupling v. WardENR 6 H. & N. 749.

Orr v. Diaper 4 Ch. Div. 92.

Practice — Interrogatories — Libel — Proprietorship of newspaper — Criminal prosecution pending — 6 & 7 Wm. 4 c. 76, sect. 19 —

340 LAW REPORTS (IRELAND). [L. R. Zs. Div. LEFROY v. BURNSIDE. 1879. Practice - Interrogatories - Libel -Proprietorsh of newspaper - Criminal prosecution pending-6 7 Wm. 4 c. 76, sect. 19-Judicature Act, 1877, sect. 27, sub-sect. 7. Since the Judicature Act, 1877, the right to discovery as to the proprietorÂship of a newspaper, conferred by the 6 & 7 Wm. 4 e. 76, a. 19, and the 32 & 33 Viet. c. 24, may be enforced by interrogatories in an action against the alleged proprietor for a libel published in the newspaper ; and the Defendant in such action cannot protect himself from answering the interrogatories on the ground that a criminal prosecution for the alleged libel is pending against the DefenÂdant, and that the interrogatories tend to criminate him. MOTION on behalf of the Plaintiff to compel the Defendant to answer interrogatories. The action was brought by the Plaintiff, who was the manager of the Queen's Printing-office, against the Defendant, for a libel contained in an article which appeared in the Saunders' Irish Daily News, of which paper the Defendant was alleged to be the proÂprietor. The article complained of imputed to the Plaintiff imÂproper conduct in obtaining and publishing certain documents in another newspaper, and was set out in the sixth paragraph of the statement of claim. A criminal prosecution had also been instiÂtuted against the Defendant in respect of the same libel. The interrogatories in respect of which the application was made were the second and third of those administered to the DeÂfendant, and were as follows : "2nd. Is it not a fact that in the said newspaper" (the SaunÂders' Irish Daily News), " published on the said 6th day of July, 1878, or some other and what date, an article appeared in the words and figures set forth in the sixth paragraph of the statement of claim in this action ? If not, how otherwise ?" " 3rd. Were not you, the Defendant William Burnside, upon and before the said 6th day of July, 1878, or some other and what date, the proprietor either alone or jointly with some other and, what person or persons, of the said newspaper ?" Q. B., C. P., & EX. DIVISIONS. VoL. 341. The answer of the Defendant to the said interrogatories was as .Ex. Div. follows :- 1879. "In reply to the second and third interrogatories, I say that LEFROY V. the Plaintiff Edward Thomas Lefroy, at the Commission of Oyer BURNSIDE. and 'Terminer for the county of the city of Dublin, held at Green-street, in the said county of the city, in August last, preferred a bill of indictment against me and one William A. Murray for having printed and published an alleged malicious and defamatory libel in the...