The appellant, a retiree, posted comments on a community Facebook page accusing the respondent real estate developer of corrupt business tactics and bribery.
The developer sued for defamation, and the appellant brought an anti-SLAPP motion under s. 137.1 of the Courts of Justice Act to dismiss the action.
The motion judge dismissed the anti-SLAPP motion, allowing the defamation action to proceed.
On appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge's decision, finding grounds to believe the defamation claim had substantial merit and that the appellant had no valid defence of fair comment, as the statements could be viewed as factual assertions and there was a basis to find malice.
The Court also upheld the finding that the likelihood of serious harm to the developer outweighed the public interest in protecting the expression.
However, the Court allowed the appeal on costs, reducing the motion judge's substantial indemnity costs award to partial indemnity.
