Sentences with phrase «judge in a defamation action»

For the Court of Appeal, this document was «obviously» relevant to proof of the alleged slander: «It would be odd indeed for a trial judge in a defamation action to have before him or her only a redacted record of an alleged slander».

Not exact matches

By entering the Promotion, each entrant releases and discharges the Sponsor, judging organization (if applicable), and any other party associated with the development or administration of this Promotion, their parent, subsidiary, and affiliated entities, and each of their respective officers, directors, members, shareholders, employees, independent contractors, agents, representatives, successors and assigns (collectively, «Sponsor Entities»), from any and all liability whatsoever in connection with this Promotion, including without limitation legal claims, costs, injuries, losses or damages, demands or actions of any kind (including without limitation personal injuries, death, damage to, loss or destruction or property, rights of publicity or privacy, defamation, or portrayal in a false light)(collectively, «Claims»).

Michael Coyle, solicitor advocate at Lawdit Solicitors, says: «The judge commented that when considered in the context of defamation law, therefore, communications of this kind were much more akin to slander than to the usual, more permanent kind of communications found in libel actions.»

While Canadian judges, like their Commonwealth siblings, are unwilling to adopt a New York Times v. Sullivan6 - type approach to defamation law (which would require public figure plaintiffs to prove actual malice in order to be successful at trial), doctrinal and technological developments point in favour of an adapted cause of action for public figure plaintiffs under Canadian law.

Though the judge considered numerous factors under this analysis, she was particularly of the view that the appropriate law for multi-jurisdictional online defamation actions should be the law where the most substantial harm to reputation was incurred, not necessarily the law of each jurisdiction where it is alleged that reputation in that jurisdiction was damaged.

Although in the past trial by jury was typical in defamation actions, the right to jury trial has recently been abolished in this context, and trial will now be by judge save in exceptional circumstances.