2 total
Successful responding party on anti-SLAPP motion denied costs as statutory presumption against costs was not rebutted.
The defendants previously brought an unsuccessful anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' $27 million defamation action regarding a publication about contraband tobacco.
The plaintiffs, as the successful responding parties, sought costs for the motion.
The court considered the presumption under section 137.1(8) of the Courts of Justice Act, which states that a successful responding party is not entitled to costs unless appropriate in the circumstances.
Finding that the motion was not frivolous, involved matters of public interest, and lacked inappropriate behaviour by the defendants, the court held that the plaintiffs failed to rebut the presumption.
No costs were awarded.
Anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss $27 million defamation action denied; plaintiffs established substantial merit and no valid defence.
The defendants brought a motion under s. 137.1 of the Courts of Justice Act to dismiss the plaintiffs' $27 million defamation action as a SLAPP suit.
The plaintiffs, who own a large tobacco manufacturing company, sued over a magazine publication alleging they smuggled contraband tobacco and were associated with organized crime.
The court found the publication related to a matter of public interest but concluded the plaintiffs' claim had substantial merit and the defendants failed to establish valid defences of justification, responsible communication, qualified privilege, or fair comment.
The motion to dismiss was denied.
