Where co-defendants participate in the same defamatory conversation and the evidence provides no rational basis for differentiating between them, materially different damages awards constitute an affront suggesting jury compromise and warrant a new trial. A trial judge's summing up in a civil jury trial must present the defence case fairly, and giving prominence to the plaintiff's evidence while making only cursory reference to cogent evidence undermining that evidence denies procedural fairness.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.