Moharib v. Seven Oaks General Hospital et al., (1999) 136 Man.R.(2d) 157 (QBM)

• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
• Case Date: April 09, 1999
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (1999), 136 Man.R.(2d) 157 (QBM)

Moharib v. Seven Oaks Hosp. (1999), 136 Man.R.(2d) 157 (QBM)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1999] Man.R.(2d) TBEd. MY.005

Nassif Moharib (plaintiff) v. Seven Oaks General Hospital, Olga Fuga and Misericordia General Hospital (defendants)

(CI 97-01-05021)

Indexed As: Moharib v. Seven Oaks General Hospital et al.

Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench

Winnipeg Centre

Lee, Master

April 9, 1999.

Summary:

The plaintiff brought a defamation action against the defendants. He alleged that Seven Oaks hospital falsely and maliciously wrote to the Medical Appointments Review Com­mittee that his privileges were revoked for incompetence. The defendants applied for summary dismissal of the action on the ground that the statement was true. Ad­ditionally, they pleaded absolute privilege.

A Master of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the action.

Editor's Note: For related cases involving the parties, see: 105 Man.R.(2d) 163; 107 Man.R.(2d) 283; 109 W.A.C. 283.

Libel and Slander - Topic 2864

Defences - Justification or truth - Evidence and proof - The plaintiff brought a defa­mation action against the defendants - He alleged that Seven Oaks hospital falsely and maliciously wrote to the Medical Appointments Review Committee that his privileges were revoked for incompetence -The defendants applied for summary dis­missal on the ground that the statement was true - Additionally, the defendants claimed that the contents of the letter were protected by absolute privilege - The plain­tiff put forward evidence challenging the decision to suspend him for incompetence - A Master of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the action - The defendants made out a case of justification and the plaintiff failed to put forward any evidence to satisfy the court that there was a triable issue - See paragraphs 5 to 14.

Libel and Slander - Topic 2928

Defences - Absolute privilege - Statements made in the course of judicial or legal proceedings - The plaintiff brought a defa­mation action against the defendants - He alleged that Seven Oaks hospital falsely and maliciously wrote to the Medical Appointments Review Committee (MARC) that his privileges were revoked for incom­petence - The defendants applied for sum­mary dismissal - They claimed, inter alia, that the proceedings of MARC, to which the letter quoted from was directed, were judicial proceedings so that the contents of the letter were protected by absolute privi­lege - A Master of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench did not dismiss the action on the basis of the defence of absolute privilege - There was a legitimate argu­ment as to whether the proceedings of MARC were judicial or quasi-judicial, where the committee's decision was only a recommendation and did not directly or indirectly affect the rights and obligations of persons - See paragraphs 12 to 13.

Cases Noticed:

Somers Estate v. Maxwell (1995), 107 Man.R.(2d) 220; 109 W.A.C. 220 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].

Moharib v. Misericordia Hospital (1996), 107 Man.R.(2d) 283; 109 W.A.C. 283 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

Coopers and Lybrand v. Minister of National Revenue, [1979] 1 S.C.R. 495; 24 N.R. 163, refd to. [para. 13].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Shorter Oxford English Dictionary [para. 11].

Counsel:

John L. Sinclair, for the plaintiff;

Michael T. Green, for the defendants.

This application was heard before Lee, Master, of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Winnipeg Centre, who delivered the following judgment on April 9, 1999.