The Divisional Court upon these facts said that they were not satisfied that the writ was served first and the paper issued afterwards, and they accordingly dismissed the motion without costs. Mr. Justice Darling, however, said that the Court believed that the statements in the newspaper had been issued for the purpose of influencing the public in some way, and that Mr. Conolly must not repeat the statement complained of, and his counsel stated that Mr. Conolly had no intention of repeating them, and undertook not to do so during the pendency of the actions. Nothing happened until September last, when a statement was made in Mr. Conolly’s paper which was ignored by Dr. Keats, but in November there began to be a repetition of the statements complained of.

Log in with your credentials

Forgot your details?