Lorne Michael Honickman

The appellants, an engineer and his company, sued for defamation after the respondent lawyer wrote a letter on behalf of his client, a gas company, describing the engineer's allegations about a gas heater explosion as 'professionally irresponsible if not deceitful or at worst malicious'.

The trial judge dismissed the action on the basis of qualified privilege.

The Court of Appeal upheld the decision, finding that the lawyer's letter was written on an occasion of qualified privilege to protect his client's interests, was sent only to those who received the engineer's initial letter, was not motivated by malice, and used language that was reasonably appropriate to the occasion.