Waterbury Newton v. Saunders, 2007 NSSC 230

• Judge: Robertson, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: June 19, 2007
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: 2007 NSSC 230;(2007), 256 N.S.R.(2d) 214 (SC)

Waterbury Newton v. Saunders (2007), 256 N.S.R.(2d) 214 (SC);

    818 A.P.R. 214

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2007] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. AU.006

Waterbury Newton (plaintiff) v. Suzanne Saunders (defendant)

(SK 262925; 2007 NSSC 230)

Indexed As: Waterbury Newton v. Saunders

Nova Scotia Supreme Court

Robertson, J.

June 19, 2007.

Summary:

A law firm sued a former client for her outstanding account relating to a divorce proceeding. Three months before trial, the law firm successfully applied to withdraw as solicitor of record. The client was stated to be a "difficult client". The client counterclaimed for $25,000 general and punitive damages for slander. The law firm applied under rule 14.25 to strike the counterclaim as failing to disclose a cause of action.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court allowed the application and struck the counterclaim on the basis that the client's claims were "obviously unsustainable".

Libel and Slander - Topic 746

The statement - What constitutes defamatory statements - Slander - Statements which are not slanderous - A law firm successfully applied to withdraw as solicitor of record three months before a client's divorce proceeding went to trial - The law firm sued the client for her outstanding account - The client counterclaimed for general and punitive damages, claiming that she was slandered by the law firm's in-court statement that she was a "difficult client" - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court allowed the law firm's rule 14.25 application to strike the counterclaim as failing to disclose a cause of action - All of the client's claims were "obviously unsustainable" - The mere statement that the client was a "difficult client" was not slander, as there was nothing in that statement of opinion that was untrue - The client failed to plead whether the slander was actionable per se - The pleadings were defective, as no material facts were pleaded to support the slander allegation - The pleadings did not state whether the statement was made in public, whether the statement was in writing or orally (or both) or who the statement was made to (only in court where judge and lawyers present?) - Special damages should have been pleaded, but were not - Further, the law firm "could reasonably expect to have a complete defence based on [the witness immunity rule and absolute privilege rule]" - There was no substance to any of the claims.

Libel and Slander - Topic 2928

Defences - Absolute privilege - Judicial, quasi-judicial or legal proceedings (incl. statements, pleadings, etc.) - [See Libel and Slander - Topic 746 ].

Libel and Slander - Topic 6121

Practice - Pleadings - General - [See Libel and Slander - Topic 746 ].

Cases Noticed:

Hunt v. T & N plc et al., [1990] 2 S.C.R. 959; 117 N.R. 321; 25 C.R. 959; 74 D.L.R.(4th) 321, refd to. [para. 9].

Hunt v. Carey Canada Inc. - see Hunt v. T & N plc et al.

Vladi Private Islands Ltd. v. Haase et al. (1990), 96 N.S.R.(2d) 323; 253 A.P.R. 323 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 9].

Tupper v. Wheeler et al., [2005] N.S.R.(2d) Uned. 47; 2005 NSCA 74, refd to. [para. 10].

Bell v. Intertan Canada Ltd. et al., [2002] Sask.R. Uned. 190; 2002 SKQB 446, refd to. [para. 17].

Wallace v. Lawrence (2002), 203 N.S.R.(2d) 197; 635 A.P.R. 197; 2002 NSCA 36, refd to. [para. 21].

Peddle v. Rowan Companies et al. (1993), 123 N.S.R.(2d) 24; 340 A.P.R. 24 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 22].

Elliott v. Insurance Crime Prevention Bureau et al. (2005), 236 N.S.R.(2d) 104; 749 A.P.R. 104; 2005 NSCA 115, refd to. [para. 29].

G.W.E. Consulting Group Ltd. v. Schwartz (1990), 72 O.R.(2d) 133 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 29].

Schimp v. RCR Catering Ltd. et al. (2004), 221 N.S.R.(2d) 379; 697 A.P.R. 379; 2004 NSCA 29, refd to. [para. 31].

Statutes Noticed:

Civil Procedure Rules (N.S.), rule 14.04, rule 14.25(1) [para. 8].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Clerk, John F., and Lindsell, The Law of Torts (19th Ed. 2006), p. 1294 [para. 18].

Gatley, Clement, Libel and Slander (10th Ed. 2003) (2004 Supp.), p. 7 [para. 16].

Counsel:

C. Patricia Mitchell, for the applicant;

Suzanne Saunders, unrepresented defendant (not present).

This application was heard on June 19, 2007, at Halifax, N.S., before Robertson, J., of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, whose following oral decision of June 19, 2007, was filed in writing on July 31, 2007.