2 total
Defamation action dismissed as negative employment reference was protected by qualified privilege and no malice was proven.
The plaintiff sued her former manager for defamation after he provided a negative employment reference to a prospective employer, resulting in a revoked job offer.
The court found that while the manager's statements were defamatory, they were made on an occasion of qualified privilege.
The plaintiff failed to prove that the manager was motivated by malice.
The court also dismissed the plaintiff's alternative tort claims as they were based on the same facts as the defamation claim.
The action was dismissed in its entirety.
A defamation action over a negative employment reference was dismissed because the statements were protected by qualified privilege without malice.
The plaintiff, Tracey Kanak, sued her former manager, Darryl Riggin, for defamation based on statements made during a job reference.
The plaintiff alleged malice, while the defendant pleaded qualified privilege and denied malice.
The court found the statements defamatory but concluded they were made on an occasion of qualified privilege.
The plaintiff failed to prove malice, as the defendant's testimony was credible and his statements were honest and not reckless.
The court also dismissed the plaintiff's alternative claims (breach of contract, intentional interference, infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy) as they were deemed "dressed up" pleadings of defamation, resting on the same impugned publications.
