Lord Selkirk School Division et al. v. Warnock, (2015) 322 Man.R.(2d) 238 (QB)
Judge | Toews, J. |
Court | Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada) |
Case Date | December 03, 2015 |
Jurisdiction | Manitoba |
Citations | (2015), 322 Man.R.(2d) 238 (QB);2015 MBQB 195 |
Lord Selkirk School Bd. v. Warnock (2015), 322 Man.R.(2d) 238 (QB)
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite: [2015] Man.R.(2d) TBEd. DE.021
Lord Selkirk School Division, Russell Goossen and Brian Johnston (plaintiffs) v. Peter Warnock (defendant)
(CI 15-01-96152; 2015 MBQB 195)
Indexed As: Lord Selkirk School Division et al. v. Warnock
Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench
Winnipeg Centre
Toews, J.
December 3, 2015.
Summary:
Warnock was a student at the Lord Selkirk Adult Learning Program who made certain postings on the internet about the school and its employees. The plaintiffs (the school division, a teacher and a director) sued Warnock for defamation and libel. The plaintiffs moved for summary judgment.
The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench allowed the motion and awarded each of the plaintiffs general damages of $20,000, aggravated damages of $10,000, and costs on a solicitor-client basis. The court also ordered a permanent mandatory injunction requiring Warnock to remove any defamatory material and restraining him from posting any further material.
Damage Awards - Topic 632
Torts - Injury to the person - Libel and slander - Warnock was a student at the Lord Selkirk Adult Learning Program who made certain postings on the internet about the school and its employees - He stated that the school division, its administrators and teaching staff were "lying, conspiring, bullying pieces of shit criminal" who actively encouraged cheating in the classroom - He referred to a specific teacher as a racist, liar, bully and criminal - He referred to a specific director as a liar and criminal - The plaintiffs (the school division, teacher and director) sued Warnock for defamation and libel - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench allowed the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment - Warnock's statements were defamatory and blatantly false, and tended to lower the plaintiffs' reputations in the eyes of a reasonable person - Warnock's allegations were particularly serious in the context of a school and its employees and could result in detrimental professional ramifications - There was a complete absence of any retraction or apology by Warnock - Each of the defendants was entitled to an award of $20,000 in general damages, $10,000 in aggravated damages, and costs on a solicitor-client basis - See paragraphs 32 to 51 and 59.
Damage Awards - Topic 2406.1
Aggravated damages - Libel and slander - [See Damage Awards - Topic 632 ].
Injunctions - Topic 6209
Particular matters - Torts - Defamation - [See Libel and Slander - Topic 5002 ].
Libel and Slander - Topic 684
The statement - What constitutes defamatory statements - Libel - What constitutes a defamatory statement - [See Damage Awards - Topic 632 ].
Libel and Slander - Topic 4423
Damages - General damages (incl. measure of) - Elements and considerations - [See Damage Awards - Topic 632 ].
Libel and Slander - Topic 4428
Damages - General damages (incl. measure of) - Aggravated damages - [See Damage Awards - Topic 632 ].
Libel and Slander - Topic 5002
Injunctions - When available - Warnock was a student at the Lord Selkirk Adult Learning Program who made certain postings on the internet about the school and its employees - The plaintiffs (the school division, a teacher and a director) successfully sued Warnock for defamation and were awarded general and aggravated damages - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench ordered a permanent mandatory injunction requiring Warnock to remove any defamatory material and restraining him from posting any further material - Despite the fact that Warnock was liable to the plaintiffs for damages, it was very likely that he would continue to publish defamatory statements - This likelihood was justified on the basis that despite having an interim injunction in place requiring Warnock to remove certain specified defamatory statements from his internet blog and enjoining him from publishing further defamatory statements about the plaintiffs, he failed to remove the specific defamatory statements in their entirety by leaving defamatory links to the site of where the blog postings had been - He also made new defamatory statements in a blog posting against the same plaintiffs only a few days before the hearing of this matter - See paragraphs 52 to 57.
Libel and Slander - Topic 5006
Injunctions - Restraining further defamation - [See Libel and Slander - Topic 5002 ].
Practice - Topic 7466.5
Costs - Solicitor and client costs - Entitlement to - Defamation actions - [See Damage Awards - Topic 632 ].
Cases Noticed:
Chaves et al. v. Shum et al. (2004), 184 Man.R.(2d) 164; 318 W.A.C. 164; 2004 MBCA 56, refd to. [para. 36].
Grant et al. v. Torstar Corp. et al., [2009] 3 S.C.R. 640; 397 N.R. 1; 258 O.A.C. 285; 2009 SCC 61, refd to. [para. 37].
Awan v. Levant, [2014] O.J. No. 5697; 2014 ONSC 6890, refd to. [para. 42].
Walker and Walker Brothers Quarries Ltd. v. CFTO Ltd. (1987), 19 O.A.C. 10; 59 O.R.(2d) 104; 37 D.L.R.(4th) 224 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 50].
Astley v. Verdun, [2011] O.T.C. Uned. 3651; 106 O.R.(3d) 792; 2011 ONSC 3651, refd to. [para. 52].
Counsel:
David Simpson and Celia Fergusson, for the plaintiffs;
The defendant was self-represented.
This matter was heard before Toews, J., of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Winnipeg Centre, who delivered the following judgment on December 3, 2015.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bordeaux Developments Corporation v Hu,
...(at paragraph 42). [53] In Lord Selkirk School Division et al. v. Warnock, 2015 MBQB 195, a general damage award of $60,000, plus an award of $30,000 for aggravated damages, was made because of defamatory allegations of [54] &......
-
The College of Pharmacists of Manitoba v. Jorgenson, 2020 MBQB 88
...[11] In addition, summary judgment was granted by this court in a defamation claim in Lord Selkirk School Division et al. v. Warnock, 2015 MBQB 195. [12] On the basis of these authorities, Mr. Jorgenson’s argument under s. 64(1) must fail. To find otherwise would lead to an [13] The College......
-
Paderewski v. Skorski, 2017 ONSC 6594
...claim in the St. Michael’s case.[150] The only other decision that is helpful is the case of Lord Selkirk School Division v. Warnock, 2015 MBQB 195 in which the plaintiffs sued a former student at the school. The student had posted statements on a blog that accused his former teacher of bei......
-
Bordeaux Developments Corporation v Hu,
...(at paragraph 42). [53] In Lord Selkirk School Division et al. v. Warnock, 2015 MBQB 195, a general damage award of $60,000, plus an award of $30,000 for aggravated damages, was made because of defamatory allegations of [54] &......
-
The College of Pharmacists of Manitoba v. Jorgenson, 2020 MBQB 88
...[11] In addition, summary judgment was granted by this court in a defamation claim in Lord Selkirk School Division et al. v. Warnock, 2015 MBQB 195. [12] On the basis of these authorities, Mr. Jorgenson’s argument under s. 64(1) must fail. To find otherwise would lead to an [13] The College......
-
Paderewski v. Skorski, 2017 ONSC 6594
...claim in the St. Michael’s case.[150] The only other decision that is helpful is the case of Lord Selkirk School Division v. Warnock, 2015 MBQB 195 in which the plaintiffs sued a former student at the school. The student had posted statements on a blog that accused his former teacher of bei......