The plaintiff moved for summary judgment on a defamation action arising from a Facebook post published by the defendant, a municipal councillor, and also sought dismissal of a counterclaim alleging Charter breaches, malicious prosecution, misfeasance in public office, and reprisal.
The court held that the online post conveyed defamatory imputations of dishonesty, profiteering, and mental instability against the plaintiff, a senior executive of a child welfare agency, and that no genuine issue requiring a trial arose on any pleaded defence, including justification, fair comment, responsible communication, qualified privilege, statutory immunity, Charter-based arguments, or reprisal under the Human Rights Code.
Applying Hryniak, the court found the paper record sufficient for a fair and proportionate adjudication.
The plaintiff recovered $25,000 in general damages and $8,000 in aggravated damages, while punitive damages and permanent injunctive relief were refused.
The counterclaim was summarily dismissed as meritless and unsupported by evidence.
