Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post

jolinar of malkshor · 07-27-2006, 03:38 PM

Can statements be protected by the use of the words "alleged", "it is rumoured" or by use of quotation marks?

This answer is no. One cannot escape liability for defamation by putting the libel behind a prefix such as "I have been told that ..." or "It is rumoured that ...", and then asserting that it was true that one had been told or that it was in fact being rumoured.... For the purpose of the law of libel, the hearsay statement is the same as a direct statement.
(Lord Devlin in Lewis v. Daily Telegraph Ltd., [1963] 2 All E.R. 151 at 173)

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Under the current legal regime, you can be sued for anything you say about another person that damages their reputation. If sued, the onus is on you to prove the truth of your statements; the fact that you genuinely believed them to be true is not good enough. Even truth is not an absolute defence --- if the court finds you told the truth but your intent was malicious, you might lose anyway. Canadian libel law is so draconian that people come from all over the world to file libel suits in Ontario.

http://www.cs.uwaterloo.ca/~shallit/libel3.html

Damages awarded for on-line defamatory statements by a parent

http://www.mross.com/law/Publication...?contentId=594

All I am saying is that if people put little comments about how they hate their teacher and that they are terrible and nasty, they open themselves up to litigation.

07-27-2006, 03:38 PM	#31
jolinar of malkshor #1 Goaltender Join Date: May 2006 Exp:	Can statements be protected by the use of the words "alleged", "it is rumoured" or by use of quotation marks? This answer is no. One cannot escape liability for defamation by putting the libel behind a prefix such as "I have been told that ..." or "It is rumoured that ...", and then asserting that it was true that one had been told or that it was in fact being rumoured.... For the purpose of the law of libel, the hearsay statement is the same as a direct statement. (Lord Devlin in Lewis v. Daily Telegraph Ltd., [1963] 2 All E.R. 151 at 173) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Under the current legal regime, you can be sued for anything you say about another person that damages their reputation. If sued, the onus is on you to prove the truth of your statements; the fact that you genuinely believed them to be true is not good enough. Even truth is not an absolute defence --- if the court finds you told the truth but your intent was malicious, you might lose anyway. Canadian libel law is so draconian that people come from all over the world to file libel suits in Ontario. http://www.cs.uwaterloo.ca/~shallit/libel3.html Damages awarded for on-line defamatory statements by a parent http://www.mross.com/law/Publication...?contentId=594 All I am saying is that if people put little comments about how they hate their teacher and that they are terrible and nasty, they open themselves up to litigation.