Pootlass v. Pootlass, (1999) 5 B.C.T.C. 21 (SC)

• Judge: Burnyeat, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
• Case Date: December 15, 1998
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: (1999), 5 B.C.T.C. 21 (SC)

Pootlass v. Pootlass (1999), 5 B.C.T.C. 21 (SC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1999] B.C.T.C. TBEd. MR.129

Lawrence Pootlass (plaintiff) v. Archie Pootlass (defendant)

(C971282)

Indexed As: Pootlass v. Pootlass

British Columbia Supreme Court

Vancouver

Burnyeat, J.

March 1, 1999.

Summary:

The plaintiff brought a defamation action for damages against the defendant (his half brother), alleging he was slandered in a February 25, 1995, band meeting wherein the defendant made statements suggesting that the plaintiff had murdered their father in 1957. The action was commenced more than two years after the allegedly defamatory statement. The plaintiff sought leave to amend the statement of claim to allege that the defendant again slandered him on August 24, 1996, by calling him a "murderer". The defendant pleaded that the action was barred by the two year limitation period in s. 3 of the Limitation Act and applied under rules 18A and 19(24) to dismiss the action.

The British Columbia Supreme Court denied the plaintiff leave to amend his state­ment of claim. The amendment would in effect permit a new cause of action, thereby defeating the purpose of the Limitation Act. Further, there were not grounds under s. 4(4) of the Act for the court to exercise its dis­cretion to allow the amendment on the basis of special circumstances. The court dis­missed the statement of claim as statute barred. Further, there were no grounds under s. 6 of the Act to postpone the running of time under the Act. To the extent that the plaintiff relied on the words actually spoken (different from quoted in statement of claim), those words were not actionable without proof of damage and because dam­ages were not proved, the statement of claim must also be dismissed on that ground.

Libel and Slander - Topic 806

The statement - Actionable statements per se - Words imputing criminal offence - See paragraphs 32 to 68.

Libel and Slander - Topic 4524

Damages - Slander - Words which are not actionable per se - See paragraphs 32 to 68.

Libel and Slander - Topic 6129

Practice - Pleadings - Statement of claim - Amendment of - See paragraphs 12 to 31.

Limitation of Actions - Topic 3246

Actions in tort - Libel and slander - When time beings to run - See paragraphs 32 to 68.

Limitation of Actions - Topic 9305

Postponement or suspension of statute - General - Discoverability rule - See para­graphs 32 to 68.

Practice - Topic 2110

Pleadings - Amendment of pleadings - Adding new cause of action - See para­graphs 12 to 31.

Cases Noticed:

Allan v. Bushnell T.V. Co., [1969] 2 O.R. 6 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

LeBlanc v. Imprimerie Acadienne Ltée, [1955] 5 D.L.R. 91 (N.B.Q.B.), refd to. [para. 13].

Mitchell v. Victoria Daily Times (No. 3) (1944), 60 B.C.R. 39 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 13].

Levi v. Reed (1881), 6 S.C.R. 482, refd to. [para. 13].

Cook v. Cook (1875), 36 U.C.Q.B. 553 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

Emmerton v. University of Sydney, [1970] 2 N.S.W.R. 633 (N.S.W.C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

Thomas v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. and Sanders, [1981] 4 W.W.R 289; 27 A.R. 547 (N.W.T.S.C.), refd to. [para. 14].

Prothotics Corp. et al. v. Bain et al. (1995), 106 Man.R.(2d) 318; 44 C.P.C.(3d) 66 (Q.B. Master), refd to. [para. 15].

Frisina v. Southam Press Ltd. (1980), 30 O.R.(2d) 65 (H.C.), affd. (1981), 33 O.R.(2d) 287 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

Onishenko Estate v. Quinlan, [1972] S.C.R. 380; 24 D.L.R.(3d) 720, refd to. [para 19].

Lui v. West Granville Manor Ltd. et al. (1985), 61 B.C.L.R. 315 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

Med Finance Co. S.A. v. Bank of Montreal et al. (1993), 29 B.C.A.C. 98; 48 W.A.C. 98; 79 B.C.L.R.(2d) 222 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

Teal Cedar Products (1977) Ltd. v. Dale Intermediaries Ltd. et al. (1996), 71 B.C.A.C. 161; 117 W.A.C. 161; 19 B.C.L.R.(3d) 282 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

Goulais et al. v. Pepin (1984), 39 C.P.C. 189 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 24].

Persen v. Rainbow, [1922] 1 W.W.R. 592 (Alta. C.A.), refd to. [para. 34].

Hahn v. Gettel (1915), 9 W.W.R. 686 (Sask. T.D.), refd to. [para. 34].

Reilander v. Bengert (1908), 7 W.L.R. 891 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 34].

C. v. D., [1925] 1 D.L.R. 734 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 37].

Cook v. Cox (1814), 3 M. & S. 110, refd to. [para. 38].

Pirie v. Carroll (1931), 4 M.P.R. 127 (N.B.C.A.), refd to. [para. 38].

Shannon v. King, [1931] 2 W.W.R. 913 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 38].

MacKay et al. v. Stomp et al., [1992] 5 W.W.R. 475; 103 Sask.R. 168 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 38].

Barkhouse v. Steele (1995), 142 N.S.R.(2d) 397; 407 A.P.R. 397 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 38].

Masunda v. Johnson, [1995] B.C.J. No. 182 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 38].

Rosen v. Alberta Motor Association Insurance Co. et al., [1994] 1 W.W.R. 719; 146 A.P.R. 219 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 38].

Voutsinos v. New Brunswick Research & Productivity Council (1993), 136 N.B.R.(2d) 364; 347 A.P.R. 364 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 38].

Floyd v. Hiram Walker & Sons Ltd., [1957] O.R. 107 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 41].

Pearson v. Rainbow (1922), 17 Alta. L.R. 470 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 49].

Lupee v. Hogan (1920), 47 N.B.R. 492 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 49].

Robertson v. Robertson (1932), 45 B.C.R. 460 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 49].

Central Trust v. Rafuse and Cordon, [1986] 2 S.C.R. 147; 69 N.R. 321; 75 N.S.R.(2d) 109; 186 A.P.R. 109, refd to. [para. 54].

Madera v. Rabi, [1989] B.C.J. No. 2204 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 56].

Larche v. Middleton (1989), 37 C.P.C.(2d) 174 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 56].

Littleboy v. Wright, 83 E.R. 301, refd to. [para. 58].

Wild v. Rarig (1975), 234 N.W.(2d) 775 (Minn. S.C.), refd to. [para. 58].

Knowles v. Goldt, [1950] 2 W.W.R. 1242 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 62].

Gibson v. McDougal (1919), 17 O.W.N. 157 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 63].

Merkoff v. Pawluk, [1931] 1 W.W.R. 669 (Alta. T.D.), refd to. [para. 63].

Brockley v. Maxwell, [1949] 1 W.W.R. 1039 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 63].

Mengarelli v. Forrest, [1972] 3 O.R. 397 (Master), refd to. [para. 63].

Johnson v. Jolliffe (1981), 26 B.C.L.R. 176 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 63].

Robertson v. Robertson (1932), 45 B.C.R. 460 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 63].

Ratcliffe v. Evans, [1892] 2 Q.B. 531 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 63].

Klein v. Kaip (1989), 78 Sask.R. 31; 37 C.P.C.(2d) 245 (Q.B.), affd. (1989), 79 Sask.R. 160; 37 C.P.C.(2d) 245 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused (1990), 105 N.R. 319; 83 Sask.R. 160 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 64].

Jones v. Jones, [1916] 1 K.B. 351, refd to. [para. 64].

Dom. Telegraph Co. v. Silver (1882), 10 S.C.R. 238, refd to. [para. 64].

Knox v. Spencer (1922), 50 N.B.R. 69 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 64].

Statutes Noticed:

Limitation Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 266, sect. 3(2)(c), sect. 4(4) [para. 12]; sect. 6(3), sect. 6(4), sect. 6(5), sect. 6(6) [para. 51].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Brown, The Law of Defamation in Canada (1987), vol. 1, generally [para. 41].

Counsel:

P.D. Le Dressay, for the plaintiff;

C.C. Lemon, for the defendant.

This case was heard on December 15, 1998, and January 28-29, 1999, at Vancouver, B.C., in Chambers before Burn­yeat, J., of the British Columbia Supreme Court, who delivered the following judgment on March 1, 1999.