The respondent, an Ontario police constable, travelled to New York City after September 11, 2001, to assist with search and rescue efforts.
The appellant newspaper published articles alleging he misrepresented himself to authorities and interfered with rescue operations.
The respondent sued for defamation.
At trial, the appellants pleaded qualified privilege but not the English defence of responsible journalism.
The jury found for the respondent.
The Court of Appeal recognized a new responsible journalism defence but denied the appellants its protection because they had not pleaded it at trial.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial, holding that the appellants should have the opportunity to avail themselves of the newly recognized defence of responsible communication on matters of public interest.