Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Grant v Torstar Corp, [2009] 3 S.C.R. 640, 2009 SCC 61, is a 2009 Supreme Court of Canada decision on the defences to the tort of defamation. The Supreme Court ruled that the law of defamation should give way to the rights of a party to speak on matters of public interest, provided the party exercises a certain level of responsibility in verifying the potentially defamatory facts.
Astley v Verdun, 2011 ONSC 3651, is a leading defamation decision released by Ontario Superior Court of Justice. The case was publicized for the amount of damages awarded to the plaintiff , and the permanent injunction ordered against the defendant .
Case name Citation Date Subject January 7, 2000 - Appointment of Beverley McLachlin as Chief Justice of Canada: Arsenault-Cameron v Prince Edward Island [2000] 1 S.C.R. 3, 2000 SCC 1 January 13, 2000 language rights Reference re Firearms Act [2000] 1 S.C.R. 783, 2000 SCC 31 June 15, 2000 Criminal law power Lovelace v Ontario
He is also liable, in certain cases, to reparation for injury caused to another by the act or fault of another person or by the act of things in his custody. To establish civil liability for defamation, the plaintiff must establish, on a balance of probabilities, the existence of an injury, a wrongful act, and of a causal connection between the ...
NEW YORK (Reuters) -E. Jean Carroll, the writer seeking millions of dollars from Donald Trump for defamation, on Thursday forcefully rejected suggestions that her reputation has been enhanced in ...
Weber v Ontario Hydro [1995] 2 SCR 929 June 29, 1995 concurrency of court jurisdiction; collective agreements R v Hibbert [1995] 2 SCR 973 February 22, 1996 Aiding and abetting, duress Hill v Church of Scientology of Toronto [1995] 2 SCR 1130 July 20, 1995 defamation; Charter interpretation RJR-MacDonald Inc v Canada (AG) [1995] 3 SCR 199
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us
2 S.C.R. 1130 was a libel case against the Church of Scientology, in which the Supreme Court of Canada interpreted Ontario's libel law in relation to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. After consideration, the Supreme Court of Canada determined that it would not follow the actual malice standard set forth in the famous United States ...