This is particularly true in this case because, contrary to the allegations
made in the defamation action, Mr. Hoskinson did act for Mr. Slagter and Jannet Inc. as he subsequently conceded,» wrote tribunal chairman Malcolm Mercer.
Not exact matches
«The propagation of such irresponsible and destructive falsehood
made against my client should not be availed the cloak of parliamentary immunity which, if had been said
in anywhere else
in the open, will certainly be giving rise to a meritorious court
action in defamation.
Another approach to avoid this concern might be to regard immunity as inapplicable to a proceeding which relates directly to another, non-immune underlying proceeding only where it is a necessary or readily foreseeable corollary of that underlying proceeding — as is the case with proceedings to enforce a foreign arbitral award, but not, presumably, with a
defamation action arising from statements
made in an earlier proceeding.
Malice is the lynchpin that
makes defamation actions winnable
in the US and there seems to have been more than enough of that
in this case.
But if courts are serious about circumscribing the chilling effect of
defamation claims, modifications will need to be
made to the structure of the tort
in order to lessen the likelihood of
actions being commenced
in the first place and to blunt the impact of claims that are
in fact brought.
In Gutowski, a municipal councilor brought an action in defamation against the appellants, fellow municipal councilors in the County of Frontenac, which stemmed from statements made by the appellants in a regular council meetin
In Gutowski, a municipal councilor brought an
action in defamation against the appellants, fellow municipal councilors in the County of Frontenac, which stemmed from statements made by the appellants in a regular council meetin
in defamation against the appellants, fellow municipal councilors
in the County of Frontenac, which stemmed from statements made by the appellants in a regular council meetin
in the County of Frontenac, which stemmed from statements
made by the appellants
in a regular council meetin
in a regular council meeting.
While representing himself
in a
defamation action against a publisher, a lawyer
made «intemperate» statements about the defendant organization
in his pleadings, including accusing it of «evil profiling.»
Thus, imposing liability on Google
in a
defamation action based on its Autocomplete function is justified
in a notice - and - takedown regime when a substantive complaint has been
made.