Civil rules are sufficient to protect reputations, are less harsh in nature and are less susceptible of being abused. [...] One is that the statement in question was true, since one can only defend a reputation one deserves (i.e. [...] Even if a statement is false, a defendant should benefit from a “reasonable publication” defence, whereby they are exonerated if they can demonstrate that their dissemination was reasonable, under the circumstances. [...] If journalists were required to be absolutely certain of every fact before they published a story, it would seriously undermine their ability to inform the public. [...] If a statement is found to have been defamatory, the remedy should be proportionate which implies, among other things, that it should aim to redress the harm done to the plaintiff rather than punish the defendant.
- Pages
- 2
- Published in
- Canada
