Milne v Ell

In the case of Milne v Ell, the plaintiff, a local government councillor, sued the defendant for defamation over a statement made during a council meeting. The defendant claimed that the plaintiff was not a fit and proper person to hold office, an allegation which was subsequently published in a local newspaper. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria, where the plaintiff sought damages for defamation.

The primary legal issues in this case were whether the imputation in question was a fact or merely an opinion, and if it was defamatory. The court needed to determine whether the statement was capable of lowering the plaintiff’s reputation in the eyes of right-thinking members of the community. Additionally, the court had to decide whether the defendant’s republication of the statement to a journalist constituted a further publication, thus making the defendant liable for damages.

The Supreme Court of Victoria found that the statement was defamatory, holding that the imputation that the plaintiff was not a fit and proper person was a factual assertion rather than a mere opinion. The court ruled that the statement was sufficiently specific to be defamatory and could lower the plaintiff’s reputation in the eyes of the community. Furthermore, the court held that the defendant was liable for republication of the statement to a journalist, as this constituted a further publication of the defamatory material. The court awarded the plaintiff damages for the defamation suffered.