All sounds like the usual jocularity on here, but if you were seriously considering raising proceedings, one or two things you may wish to consider:
1 - You would have no title to sue, as any comments made were not in relation to you, but rather your wife.
yes but my wife does,not hard to work out is it
I do wonder whether your wife is even aware of this subject. Could you perhaps be litigating in another's name? Could this thread be evidence of that? (Note, these are rhetorical questions).
2 - A letter of objection would almost certainly achieve qualified privilege and so malice would require to be established, by the pursuer.
true and as the objection contains no facts pertaining to the applicant then it can only be malice towards the applicants spouse
Perhaps the point being made was not emphasised sufficiently. The pursuer (i.e. your wife) would require to establish the malicious intention of the defender to injure her reputation or character (point of pedantry: the party against whom civil proceedings are raised in Scotland is the defender; the defendant is a common law jurisdiction term, such as in E&W). The letter appears to me to be nothing more than a plea to the Council to prevent a perceived attempt at carbetbagging. Whether that is factually right or wrong (on which I express no opinion), there is nothing obvious in the character of malice in the terms used or meaning of the letter. 3 - The messages which you have posted on here could perhaps be used to show that your wife was abusing the court process by raising proceedings for the purposes solely of putting a defender to expense. Such could attract an award of expenses on an agent/client basis, which would mean you pay all the monies paid by the defender to his legal team.
those comments were made be me, not my wife.
this very process is used daily by large companies and government bodies to stop any litigation before it gets to court they simply make it to expensive to pursue it
are you deliberately missing the point,i have no assets, i am prepared to raise action as a party litigant,so no solicitors to pay,the defendant would have to at the very least seek legal advice prob in the region of £500 and if i lost which is a distinct possibility then he would be out of pocket £500.
and although he may be awarded expenses it doesnt mean he would get them does it 
Many people misunderstand the system of expenses in litigation in Scotland. I note your answer discusses the action in the first person, presumably a mistake as it could only be raised at your wife's instance?
Not sure the defender would require to seek legal advice, as all he needs to do is read this thread to see your wife's case is unlikely to get past the first hurdle. Even if he did, the point about agent/client (as opposed to party/party) expenses, is that the person so awarded can recover all their costs from the other side, including the £500.
If your wife has any assets, these would be at risk. 4 - Calling someone a retard could qualify as a defamatory statement if it caused damage to their reputation, or was malicious.
really!! then he could always sue meI suspect like most of society, he is more concerned with struggling through difficult times. In any event, I am sure your comments are simply written without any real intent to injure. 5 - Defamation in Scotland does indeed cover the written and spoken word (Libel/Slander in E&W and other common law jurisdictions)
6 - Struggling to find any injurious imputation on character or reputation in the letter complained of. If, as is suggested, there have been previous instances of plates being acquired purely for profit and there can be shown to be a connection between you and your wife in relation to the application, which in my view would be possible given the inference to be drawn from the comments on this website and even this thread, then it appears to me that the information is based on fact.
have you heard from the applicant on here,so wheres the factsNo idea what you are intending with this. Are you asking me/posing two questions here? If so, what relation do they have to the previous paragraph?There is simply no defamatory material here, so maybe best not to waste your own and the court's time with this.
maybe thats not the purpose of raising any future action in this case
this guy has exercised his right to object,the objection has no facts attached to it,just hearsay.
its malicious pure and simple.
you cant apportion blame by association can you 
Yes, I suspect from what you have posted simply in this thread, it would be accepted that your wife is acting as your proxy in the application and, indeed, in any litigation. Strangely enough, the law in this country has developed rules to deal with situations where one person litigates in name for the interests of another. Like its use by the manufactured pop band Hearsay, the use of the term "pure and simple" in this context perhaps has greater significance in the subconscious self-referential sense? NB. The Committee may consider an objection even when late, if it resolves to do so.
Login
Register
FAQ
