David Contant

The appellants appealed a trial judgment finding them liable for defamation and awarding punitive damages.

They argued the trial judge erred by refusing to admit a 1996 newspaper article regarding the respondent's reputation, failing to consider a notice to admit, improperly using contempt evidence, and misapplying the test for punitive damages.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no errors in the trial judge's evidentiary rulings or procedure.

The Court also upheld the punitive damages award, noting the malicious and outrageous nature of the defamation warranted punishment and deterrence.