Defence of Responsible Communication on Matters of Public Interest

• Author: David A. Potts
• Profession: Barrister, Bar of Ontario
• Pages: 298-306

298

 : Defence of Responsible

Communication on Matters of Public

Interest

A. INTRODUCTION

e Supreme Court of Canada created a new defence called responsible com-

munication on matters of public interest.

See Grant v. Torstar Corp.,  SCC  at para. 

Cusson v. Quan (Ottawa Citizen) et al.,   SCC 

e defence i n Canada “should be viewed as a new defence, leaving the

traditional defence of qualied privi lege intact.”

See Grant v. Torstar Corp.,  SCC  at para. 

e defence is available to anyone who publishes materials of public inter-

est on any medium. See Grant v. Torstar Corp.,  SCC  at paras. –:

A second prelimina ry question is what the new defence should b e called. In

arguments before us, the defence was referred to as the res ponsible journal-

ism test. is has the value of capturing the essence of the defence in suc-

cinct style. However, the tradit ional media are rapidly being complemented

by new ways of commu nicating on matters of public i nterest, many of them

online, which do not i nvolve journalists. ese new disseminators of news

and information should, absent good reasons for exclusion, be subject to the

same laws as establi shed media outlets. I agree with Lord Ho mann that the

new defence is “available to anyone who publishes material of public interest

in any medium”: Jameel, at para .  [emphasis added].

A revie w of recent defamation case law sugge sts that many actions now

concern blog postings and other online medi a which are potentially both more

ephemeral and more ubiquitous than traditional print media. While est ab-