Sean Flaherty

The defendants brought a motion under section 137.1 of the Courts of Justice Act to dismiss the plaintiff's defamation action as an impermissible SLAPP suit.

The plaintiff, a former municipal councillor, sued the defendants over a newspaper column that suggested he had a conflict of interest regarding a municipal development project.

The court found that while the defamation claim had substantial merit and the defences of fair comment and responsible communication lacked a real prospect of success, the plaintiff failed to prove that the harm he suffered outweighed the public interest in protecting the political expression.

The motion was granted and the action was dismissed.

The plaintiff manufacturer sued the defendant metal processing company for the unpaid balance and extras on a contract for a custom Tension Leveling & Cut-To-Length Line.

The defendant counterclaimed for lost profits, alleging the machine failed to produce flat, memory-free sheets and could not process heavy gauge coils.

The court found that the defendant breached the contract by prematurely terminating the final acceptance testing, which was a condition precedent, thereby denying the plaintiff the opportunity to remedy any defects.

The plaintiff was awarded the contract balance and partial payment for extras, and the counterclaim was dismissed.

At a status hearing under Rule 48.14(13), the plaintiffs sought to restore their breach of contract action to the trial list, while the defendants sought its dismissal for delay.

The action had been commenced in 2008 and was subject to multiple delays, missed timetables, and changes of counsel.

The court found that the plaintiffs failed to provide an acceptable explanation for the nearly seven-year delay, particularly the period following an unsuccessful mediation in 2013.

As the plaintiffs failed to satisfy their onus to show cause why the action should not be dismissed, the court dismissed the action with costs.