Myers v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. et al., (1999) 103 O.T.C. 81 (SC)
Judge | Bellamy, J. |
Court | Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada) |
Case Date | November 19, 1999 |
Jurisdiction | Ontario |
Citations | (1999), 103 O.T.C. 81 (SC) |
Myers v. CBC (1999), 103 O.T.C. 81 (SC)
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite: [1999] O.T.C. TBEd. NO.133
Martin G. Myers (plaintiff) v. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, Trish Wood, Nicholas Regush, Paul Webster & David Stuber (defendants)
(96-CU-104591)
Indexed As: Myers v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. et al.
Court of Ontario
Superior Court of Justice
Bellamy, J.
November 19, 1999.
Summary:
The Canadian Broadcasting Corp. (CBC) aired an episode of the television program The Fifth Estate entitled the "The Heart of the Matter". The program dealt with a heart medication called nifedipine. The program considered questions about the safety of the drug and the general process by which the Health Protection Branch of Health Canada approved drugs for patient use. The broadcast included clips from interviews that The Fifth Estate reporters had conducted with a number of people, including the plaintiff, a Toronto cardiologist. The plaintiff sued the CBC et al. (the defendants) for damages for defamation. He alleged that the statements broadcast from his interview and the innuendoes which arose from the presentation of those statements in the context of the program were libelous of him personally and professionally. In support of his claim, the plaintiff relied on the entirety of the broadcast, its introduction, text, visualizations, context and tone. The defendants claimed that the portions of the broadcast which referred to the plaintiff were not capable of constituting defamation. Alternatively, the defendants argued that any facts which did defame the plaintiff were true and any opinions which defamed him were fair comments based on true facts on matters of public interest. The defendants also contended that the broadcast dealt with issues of pressing public importance which viewers had a right to know and which the CBC had a right to communicate.
The Ontario Superior Court held that the defendants had defamed the plaintiff and awarded the plaintiff general compensatory damages of $200,000.
Damage Awards - Topic 632
Torts - Injury to the person - Libel and slander - See paragraphs 164 to 179.
Libel and Slander - Topic 644
The statement - What constitutes defamatory statements - General principles - Disparagement of reputation - See paragraphs 36 to 46.
Libel and Slander - Topic 650
The statement - What constitutes defamatory statements - General principles - From words and video - Television broadcast - See paragraphs 36 to 46.
Libel and Slander - Topic 903
The statement - Innuendo - What constitutes - See paragraphs 36 to 65 and 112 to 139.
Libel and Slander - Topic 2981
Defences - Qualified privilege - General - See paragraphs 66 to 75.
Libel and Slander - Topic 2983
Defences - Qualified privilege - When available - See paragraphs 66 to 82.
Libel and Slander - Topic 2995
Defences - Qualified privilege - Public duty - General - See paragraphs 76 to 81.
Libel and Slander - Topic 3106
Defences - Fair comment - Elements of fair comment - General - See paragraphs 84 to 87.
Libel and Slander - Topic 3114
Defences - Fair comment - What constitutes fair comment - See paragraphs 84 to 139.
Libel and Slander - Topic 3107
Defences - Fair comment - Elements of fair comment - Honest expression of opinion - See paragraphs 104 to 111.
Libel and Slander - Topic 3108
Defences - Fair comment - Elements of fair comment - Public interest - See paragraph 103.
Libel and Slander - Topic 3109
Defences - Fair comment - Elements of fair comment - Truth - See paragraphs 94 to 102.
Libel and Slander - Topic 4063
Malice - As a bar to defence of fair comment or qualified privilege - Requirement of express or actual malice - See paragraphs 140 to 153.
Libel and Slander - Topic 4421
Damages - General damages - Measure of - General principles - See paragraphs 155 to 163.
Libel and Slander - Topic 4423
Damages - General damages - Measure of - Elements and considerations - See paragraphs 164 to 179.
Cases Noticed:
Color Your World Corp. v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. et al. (1998), 106 O.A.C. 279; 156 D.L.R.(4th) 27 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 37].
Hodgson v. Canadian Newspapers Co. et al. (1998), 68 O.T.C. 81; 39 O.R.(3d) 235 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 39].
Lewis v. Daily Telegraph Ltd., [1963] 2 All E.R. 151; [1964] A.C. 234 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 43].
Grossman v. CFTO-T.V. Ltd. et al. (1982), 39 O.R.(2d) 498 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 46].
Botiuk v. Toronto Free Press Publications - see Botiuk v. Bardyn et al.
Botiuk v. Bardyn et al., [1995] 3 S.C.R. 3; 186 N.R. 1; 85 O.A.C. 81; 126 D.L.R.(4th) 609, refd to. [para. 67].
Gustadt v. Reininger (1995), 27 O.R.(3d) 152 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 67].
Hill v. Church of Scientology of Toronto and Manning, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 1130; 184 N.R. 1; 84 O.A.C. 1; 126 D.L.R.(4th) 129, refd to. [para. 68].
Jones v. Bennett et al., [1969] S.C.R. 277, refd to. [para. 71].
Grenier v. Southam Inc. et al., [1997] O.A.C. Uned. 295 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 72].
Silva v. Toronto Star Newspapers Ltd. (1998), 167 D.L.R.(4th) 554 (Ont. Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 72].
Moises v. Canadian Newspaper Co. (1996), 76 B.C.A.C. 263; 125 W.A.C. 263; 30 C.C.L.T.(2d) 145 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 73].
Camporese v. Parton (1983), 47 B.C.L.R. 78 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 74].
Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Ltd. et al. (1999), 250 N.R. 1 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 75].
Drew v. Toronto Star Ltd., [1947] O.R. 730 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 84].
Kemsley v. Foot, [1952] A.C. 345; [1952] 1 All E.R. 501 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 90].
Bains v. Indo-Canadian Times Inc. (1995), 57 B.C.A.C. 90; 94 W.A.C. 90; 38 C.P.C.(3d) 53 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 94].
Horrocks v. Lowe, [1975] A.C. 135; [1974] 1 All E.R. 662 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 107].
Vogel v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. et al., [1982] 3 W.W.R. 97 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 145].
McElroy v. Cowper-Smith and Woodman, [1967] S.C.R. 425, refd to. [para. 160].
Baltrop v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. (1978), 25 N.S.R.(2d) 637; 36 A.P.R. 637 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 171].
Atkinson and Atkinson v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. (1981), 49 N.S.R.(2d) 381; 96 A.P.R. 381 (T.D.), dist. [para. 175].
Thomas v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. and Sanders (1981), 27 A.R. 547; 16 C.C.L.T. 113 (N.W.T.S.C.), dist. [para. 175].
Ungaro v. Toronto Star Newspapers Ltd. et al. (1997), 23 O.T.C. 25; 144 D.L.R.(4th) 84 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 176].
Statutes Noticed:
Libel and Slander Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. L-12, sect. 23 [para. 95]; sect. 24 [para. 107].
Authors and Works Noticed:
Brown, The Law of Defamation in Canada (2nd Ed. 1999), vol. 1, p. 1.5(3) [para. 38].
Gatley on Libel and Slander (9th Ed. 1998), p. 81 [para. 42].
Counsel:
Christopher Ashby, for the plaintiff;
Mark Freiman and David Leonard, for the defendants.
This matter was heard on May 25 to 28, 31, June 1, 2, 3, 7 to 11, 14 to 18, 21, 23, 24, and 28 to 30, 1999, before Bellamy, J., of the Ontario Superior Court, who delivered the following judgment on November 19, 1999.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
St. Elizabeth Home Society v. Hamilton (City) et al., [2005] O.T.C. 1074 (SC)
...v. Bardyn et al., [1995] 3 S.C.R. 3; 186 N.R. 1; 85 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 245]. Myers v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. et al. (1999), 103 O.T.C. 81 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. Halls v. Mitchell, [1928] S.C.R. 125, refd to. [para. 246]. Horrocks v. Lowe, [1974] 1 All E.R. 662; [1975] A.C.......
-
Dinyer-Fraser v. Laurentian Bk., 2005 BCSC 225
...Broadcasting Corp., [1982] 3 W.W.R. 97; 35 B.C.L.R. 7 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 239]. Myers v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. et al. (2000), 103 O.T.C. 81; 47 C.C.L.T.(2d) 272 (Sup. Ct.), affd. (2001), 147 O.A.C. 310; 6 C.C.L.T.(3d) 112 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Gracey v. Scott et al., [2002] B.C.......
-
Creative Salmon Co. v. Staniford, (2009) 266 B.C.A.C. 182 (CA)
...(S.C.), affd. (2000), 144 B.C.A.C. 295; 236 W.A.C. 295; 2000 BCCA 629, consd. [para. 54]. Myers v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. et al. (1999), 103 O.T.C. 81; 47 C.C.L.T.(2d) 272 (Sup. Ct.), revd. in part (2001), 147 O.A.C. 310; 54 O.R.(3d) 626; 6 C.C.L.T.(3d) 112 (C.A.), leave to appeal deni......
-
Whatcott v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp., (2015) 466 Sask.R. 235 (QB)
...refd to. [para. 47]. Chalmers v. Payne (1835), 2 C.M. & R. 156, refd to. [para. 49]. Myers v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. et al. (2000), 103 O.T.C. 81 (Sup. Ct.), affd. (2001), 147 O.A.C. 310; 54 O.R.(3d) 626 (C.A.), leave to appeal denied (2001), 289 N.R. 200; 163 O.A.C. 400 (S.C.C.), ......
-
St. Elizabeth Home Society v. Hamilton (City) et al., [2005] O.T.C. 1074 (SC)
...v. Bardyn et al., [1995] 3 S.C.R. 3; 186 N.R. 1; 85 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 245]. Myers v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. et al. (1999), 103 O.T.C. 81 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. Halls v. Mitchell, [1928] S.C.R. 125, refd to. [para. 246]. Horrocks v. Lowe, [1974] 1 All E.R. 662; [1975] A.C.......
-
Dinyer-Fraser v. Laurentian Bk., 2005 BCSC 225
...Broadcasting Corp., [1982] 3 W.W.R. 97; 35 B.C.L.R. 7 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 239]. Myers v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. et al. (2000), 103 O.T.C. 81; 47 C.C.L.T.(2d) 272 (Sup. Ct.), affd. (2001), 147 O.A.C. 310; 6 C.C.L.T.(3d) 112 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Gracey v. Scott et al., [2002] B.C.......
-
Creative Salmon Co. v. Staniford, (2009) 266 B.C.A.C. 182 (CA)
...(S.C.), affd. (2000), 144 B.C.A.C. 295; 236 W.A.C. 295; 2000 BCCA 629, consd. [para. 54]. Myers v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. et al. (1999), 103 O.T.C. 81; 47 C.C.L.T.(2d) 272 (Sup. Ct.), revd. in part (2001), 147 O.A.C. 310; 54 O.R.(3d) 626; 6 C.C.L.T.(3d) 112 (C.A.), leave to appeal deni......
-
Whatcott v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp., (2015) 466 Sask.R. 235 (QB)
...refd to. [para. 47]. Chalmers v. Payne (1835), 2 C.M. & R. 156, refd to. [para. 49]. Myers v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. et al. (2000), 103 O.T.C. 81 (Sup. Ct.), affd. (2001), 147 O.A.C. 310; 54 O.R.(3d) 626 (C.A.), leave to appeal denied (2001), 289 N.R. 200; 163 O.A.C. 400 (S.C.C.), ......