claimed £1,000 damages. The action was heard by Macfarlan J.
and a jury. The trial Judge directed the jury to find a verdict for the defendant on the ground that the article complained of was not capable of bearing the defamatory meaning attributed to it by the plaintiff. The jury accordingly returned a verdict for the defendant. The plaintiff applied to the Full Court of the Supreme Court for a new trial, which was refused.
The plaintiff now applied to the High Court for leave to appeal from that decision.
Notice of the plaintiff's intention to move the Court for leave to appeal was served on the respondent.
Cussen (with him Minogue), for the applicant. Leave to appeal is sought as it is doubtful whether the order of the Full Court is final or interlocutory.
Lewis, for the respondent, referred to Nolan v. Clifford 1.
THE COURT delivered the following judgment :- We refuse the application on the ground that the applicant is entitled to bring an appeal as of right.
Application refused. Solicitor for the applicant, N. H. Sonenberg. Solicitor for the respondent, Norman A. Miller.
1(1904) 1 C.L.R. 429