Supreme Court
Decision Information
Abstract: The Plaintiff was a Regional Conservation Engineer with the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development - The Defendants were the Canadian Broadcasting Company and a reporter-editor thereof - Plaintiff alleged that four radio broadcasts with respect to his involvement and actions as Regional Conservation Engineer in the drilling of an off-shore exploratory well defamed him - Defendants contend their broadcasts were not defamatory or, in the alternative, that they are entitled to rely on the alternate defences of justification, fair comment and privilege.
Decision: The Court found for the Plaintiff and awarded $20,000.00 damages, jointly and severally - To succeed in an action for defamation, the Plaintiff must show that there was a publication that identified him and that upon an ordinary interpretation of the words used, the publication tended to convey a meaning defamatory to the Plaintiff, either by forthrightly saying so or by a reasonable inference flowing therefrom - The first three broadcasts either named the Plaintiff or identified him sufficiently such that average people would understand that he was being referred to - Further, the broad and general import of the words spoken were capable of conveying to an average person a defamatory imputation that the Plaintiff was unfit to hold his position and was guilty of misconduct - The Plaintiff was not defamed by the fourth broadcast as he was not identified therein and the words used were not capable of conveying a defamatory meaning - The three defences put forward by the Defendants were rejected by the court on the basis that the defamatory portions of the publication were untrue and therefore indefensible - When assessing the appropriate damages award, the court had regard to the fact that the Defendants issued no retraction or apology, that the Plaintiff suffered no financial loss but did suffer a loss of authority within his employment, and that the broadcasts were made some time after the events in question, thereby reducing the possibility of justification by mistake.
Subjects: Defamation
Keywords: Defences
Publication
Broadcast
Justification
Fair comment
privilege