The plaintiff sued for libel arising from an open letter delivered by the defendant, then a municipal council candidate, to Toronto councillors and the Mayor concerning alleged influence over a controversial City lease and related election finance questions.
The court held that the letter was defamatory and referred to the plaintiff, but found that the occasion of publication attracted qualified privilege and that portions of the letter also constituted fair comment on matters of public interest.
The court rejected the defence of responsible communication as unavailable on these facts, but held the plaintiff failed to prove express malice sufficient to defeat qualified privilege or fair comment.
The action was dismissed, with contingent general damages assessed at $22,500.
