Defamation: Libel and Slander: Difference between revisions

From Clicklaw Wikibooks
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
mNo edit summary
 
(9 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Dial-A-Law Blurb}}
{{REVIEWEDPLS | reviewer = [https://owenbird.com/lawyers/daniel-h-coles/ Daniel Coles], Owen Bird Law Corporation and [https://pacificlaw.ca/about-our-lawyers/christopher-v-morcom/ Christopher Morcom], Pacific Law Group|date= February 2022}} {{Dial-A-Law TOC|expanded = rights}}
The law of defamation protects a person’s reputation from unjustified harm. Learn what kinds of communication are considered defamatory, as well as the defences to a defamation action.


{{Dial-A-Law TOC|expanded = rights}}
==Common questions==
==What is defamation?==
===What is defamation?===
Defamation is communication about a person that tends to hurt their reputation. It causes people who read or hear the communication to think less of the person. The communication must be made to other people, not just to the person it's about. If defamation is spoken, then it is called '''slander'''. If it is written, it is called '''libel'''. It can also be a gesture, which is a type of slander.
'''Defamation''' is communication about a person that tends to hurt their reputation. It makes people who read or hear the communication think less of that person.


The law protects your reputation against defamation. If someone defames you, you can sue them for money (called ''damages'') for harming your reputation. You must sue in supreme court, not provincial court, and you must sue within 2 years of the defamation. This is the '''limitation period'''. It starts when the defamatory statement was made or published. For more on the court system, check script [[Our Court System and Solving Disputes (Script 432)|432]], called “Our Court System and Solving Disputes.”
The communication must be made to other people, not just conveyed privately.


The law doesn't protect you from a personal insult or a remark that injures only your pride. It protects reputation, not feelings. So if someone calls you a lazy slob, you might be hurt, but you would not have a defamation complaint unless the statement was made to another person.
If defamation is spoken, it’s called '''slander'''. If it’s written, it’s called '''libel'''.


If a person tells someone that you cheat in your business dealings, then you probably have a good reason to sue the person, as long as they say it to someone else, not just to you.
The law protects you from defamation. If someone defames you, you can sue them for money (called damages) for harming your reputation.


Defamation can be a crime under the ''Criminal Code'', but only rarely. This script is about civil, not criminal, defamation.
===What kinds of communication can amount to defamation?===
To establish a defamation claim, you must show that the communication meets three requirements. You have to show that:
* the communication was '''defamatory''' (that it would tend to lower your reputation in the eyes of a reasonable person),
* it referred to '''you''', and
* it was communicated to '''at least one other person'''.


If someone has defamed you, and the publication also violates your reasonable expectation of privacy, you may also be able to sue for breach of privacy under the BC ''[http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/96373_01 Privacy Act]''.
Personal insults that only injure your pride normally don’t satisfy this test. But if someone spreads rumours accusing you of a crime, for example, you’d have a much stronger claim that this harms your reputation.


Further, [http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/96210_01#section7 section 7] of the BC ''[http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/96210_01 Human Rights Code]'' prohibits another type of defamation, called a discriminatory publication. For more information on that, contact the [http://www.bchrt.bc.ca/ BC Human Rights Tribunal] at 604.775.2000 in Vancouver and 1.888.440.8844 elsewhere in BC. Also, check script [[Human Rights and Discrimination Protection (Script 236)|236]], called “Human Rights and Discrimination Protection.”
===What kinds of damages might be awarded in a defamation lawsuit?===
If the person bringing a defamation lawsuit (the “plaintiff”) can prove they were defamed, and the defendant doesn’t have a defence to the claim, a court may award '''damages''' for loss of reputation. These are often called '''general damages'''.


==What is libel?==
Awards for general damages vary widely, from a few thousand dollars to tens of thousands of dollars. They depend on several factors, including:
Libel is the type of defamation with a permanent record, like social media and other online posts, newspapers, letters, emails, pictures, and radio and TV broadcasts.


If you can prove that someone libeled you, and that person does not have a good defence (defences are described later) then a court may award you '''general damages''' for loss of reputation. General damages can range from small to large amounts. It depends on several factors including how serious the allegation against you is, the credibility of your accuser (how believable they are), how broadly the words were published, and your position in the community.  For example, if you are a professional, general damages may be higher.  
* the plaintiff’s position and standing in the community,
* the nature and seriousness of the defamation,
* the mode and extent of publication,
* the absence or refusal of any retraction or apology, and
* the conduct of the defendant from the time of the defamatory statements to judgment.


You may also be entitled to '''special damages''', such as lost earnings, but only if you can prove that the lost earnings resulted from the defamatory statement, and not from other factors.
How widely the remarks were shared is an especially important factor in assessing damages in internet defamation cases.


If someone publishes with malice, you may be also entitled to aggravated or even punitive damages.  
The plaintiff may also be entitled to '''special damages''', such as lost earnings, but only if they can prove that the lost earnings resulted from the defamatory statement, and not from other factors.


But going to Supreme Court is expensive and even if you win, you may spend more on legal fees than you get in damages. The court will not award you your full legal costs, even if you win.
If someone makes defamatory statements with malice, the plaintiff may also be entitled to '''aggravated''' or even '''punitive damages'''.


==What is slander?==
For more on how damages work, see our [https://www.peopleslawschool.ca/defamation/ in-depth guidance on defamation].
Slander is the type of defamation with no permanent record. Normally it's a spoken statement. It can also be a hand gesture or something similar. The law treats slander differently from libel: with slander, you may have to prove you suffered damages, in the form of financial loss, to get compensation.


You can sue for slander without proving you had an actual financial loss only if the words spoken do one of the following things:
===What’s involved in suing someone for defamation?===
*accuse you of a crime (unless the accusation is made to the police)
In BC, you must bring a defamation lawsuit in BC Supreme Court, not Provincial Court. It must be brought within two years of the defamation. This window of time is the '''limitation period'''. The clock begins when the defamatory statement was made or published. To start the lawsuit, you must file documents in court and deliver them to (“serve” them on) the other party. For details, see our information on [https://dialalaw.peopleslawschool.ca/starting-a-lawsuit/ starting a lawsuit].
*accuse you of having a contagious disease
*make negative remarks about you in your work, profession, trade, or business
{| class="wikitable"
*accuse you of adultery
|align="left"|'''Consider alternatives to going to court'''
Going to BC Supreme Court is expensive. Even if you win, you may spend more on legal fees than you get in damages. A court can award costs to the winner of a lawsuit, but costs cover only a small portion of your full legal costs. If possible, it’s best to resolve the dispute outside of court. See our guidance on [https://dialalaw.peopleslawschool.ca/resolving-disputes-without-going-to-court/ alternatives to going to court].
|}


If the words spoken don’t accuse you of any of these things, then you would have to show that the words caused you a financial loss.
===What if someone accuses me of defamation?===
To establish a defamation claim, the person accusing you must show that:


==What about the right to free speech?==
* the communication was '''defamatory''' (that it would tend to lower their reputation in the eyes of a reasonable person),
The law protects a person's reputation but this protection can restrict other rights, such as the right to free speech. The law tries to balance these competing rights. Sometimes, even though someone made a defamatory statement that hurt a person's reputation, the law considers freedom of speech and expression more important. The next section explains the common defences available to a person who makes a defamatory statement.
* it referred to '''them''', and
* it was communicated to '''at least one other person'''.


==What are the defences to a defamation lawsuit?==
If your accuser proves these three elements, the onus shifts to you to put up a defence. The following six defences are available to you:
If someone sues for defamation, the most common defences are:
*truth (known in law as '''justification''')
*absolute privilege
*qualified privilege
*fair comment
*responsible communication on matters of public interest
*innocent dissemination


===1.  Truth or justification===
* '''Truth''', also known as justification, if the defamatory statement is substantially true and you can prove it.
A statement may hurt your reputation, but if it is true, anyone who says it has a valid defence if you sue them for defamation. They just have to prove that their statement is more likely true than not.
* '''Absolute privilege''', if the statement is made in certain proceedings (like a lawsuit).
* '''Qualified privilege''', if the statement is made in performing a public or private duty.
* '''Fair comment''', if it’s a statement of opinion, based on stated and true facts, on a matter of public interest.
* '''Responsible communication on matters of public interest''', if the statement concerns a matter of public interest and was made responsibly. This includes being diligent in trying to verify the statement and seeking the other party’s side of the story before circulating it.
* '''Innocent dissemination''', if the person distributed the defamatory statement unknowingly, and wasn't negligent in not knowing. And they must have immediately removed the statement on learning of the defamation.


===2. Absolute privilege===
For more on each of these defences, see our guidance on [https://www.peopleslawschool.ca/accused-of-defamation/ if you’ve been accused of defamation].
People must be able to speak freely in our judicial and quasi-judicial systems, without worrying that someone may sue them. So the law recognizes a complete and unqualified defense of absolute privilege. This defense allows people to make false and defamatory statements in criminal, quasi-judicial, and judicial proceedings, and in parliament.


This defense also protects a person who makes defamatory statements in a civil lawsuit, such as in a notice of civil claim or defense, at an examination for discovery, or in court. And this defense protects a person who has made defamatory statements in a criminal case. For example, you cannot sue for defamation based on a complaint to the police—as long as the complaint is not repeated to others.
===What is the effect of an apology?===
One factor a judge will look at in deciding on a damages award for defamation is whether the person accused later retracted their statements or offered an apology. If they can show they made an effort to walk back their remarks, it’s likely they’ll pay less in damages if the matter goes to court.


Absolute privilege also protects a person who makes a defamatory statement in a quasi-judicial proceeding, like a hearing before a professional regulatory body such as the law society.
But an apology or retraction doesn’t prevent someone from suing for defamation. It just limits the damages.
 
But absolute privilege does not protect a person who repeats their statement outside of court or the criminal or regulatory processes.
 
===3.  Qualified privilege===
Qualified privilege allows a person to make defamatory statements about another person without liability. Qualified privilege arises when a person makes a defamatory statement in performing a public or private duty, and they make the statement only to people with a corresponding interest in receiving it.
 
The duty can be legal, social, or moral. The test is whether a person of ordinary intelligence would think a duty existed to communicate the information to the audience it was made to.
 
There are no exact rules on when qualified privilege arises. It depends on the facts of a case. If the communication is made under qualified privilege, the defense applies even when very strong language is used, or the statement is false.
 
It is hard to rely on this defense for statements made on the internet because the defense protects a person only if they limit their defamatory statements to people who have an interest in hearing it. Defamatory statements on the internet are not limited this way. Instead, they go to the public. So they do not meet this test unless it is a matter that the public would be interested in or the internet publication is on a members-only site, not open to the public. 
 
An example of qualified privilege is when a previous employer provides a bad reference to a potential employer. If the previous employer honestly believed in the bad reference, then qualified privilege may protect them in giving the bad reference.
 
===4.  Fair comment===
We all are free to comment—even harshly—about issues of public interest, as long as we are clear that our comments are:
*expressed in a way that shows they are opinion, not fact.
*based on facts that can be proven and those facts are either stated or otherwise known to readers or listeners.
*not made maliciously.
 
For example, a newspaper columnist may write that a Member of Parliament (MP) says he supports equality and equal rights, but he opposes same-sex marriages. The columnist writes that the MP is hypocritical. If the MP sues the columnist for defamation, the columnist may have the defence of fair comment.
 
===5. Responsible communication on matters of public interest===
In a December 2009 case, the Supreme Court of Canada established this new defence to a libel claim. The court said that journalists should be able to report statements and allegations—even if not true—if there’s a public interest in distributing the information to a wide audience. This defence, which looks at the whole context of a situation, can apply if:
*the news was urgent, serious, and of public importance, and
*the journalist used reliable sources, and tried to get and report the other side of the story.
 
The court defined '''journalist''' widely to include bloggers and anyone else publishing material of ''public interest in any medium''.
 
===6. Innocent dissemination===
The defense of innocent dissemination is important in the internet era. Generally, a person who takes part in publishing a defamatory statement is responsible for its publication. This includes a writer, editor, printer, and distributor. But a person who acts only as a distributor may be able to rely on the defense of innocent dissemination if they:
*did not know that they were distributing a defamatory statement
*were not negligent in not knowing, and immediately removed it from their website or from distribution when they learned of the defamatory statement. 
 
==What is the effect of an apology?==
A newspaper or a TV or radio station that publishes or broadcasts a libel can limit the amount of the damages they may have to pay by publishing or broadcasting an apology right away. But an apology or retraction does not prevent the libeled party from suing.
 
==Summary==
The law of defamation protects your reputation against false statements. If a person makes a false statement to someone and it hurts your reputation, you can sue the person who made the false statement for damages. But because of other competing rights in our society, such as free speech and fair comment, you will not always win.
 
 
[updated February 2018]
 
'''The above was last reviewed for accuracy by Karen Zimmer and edited by John Blois.'''
 
----
----


===Explore further===
{| class="wikitable"
|align="left"|'''More questions & answers'''
At [https://www.peopleslawschool.ca/webinar/defamation-in-bc/ a webinar] in March 2022, lawyer Daniel Coles answered common questions about defamation, including what it is and what you can do about it.
|}
==Who can help==
===Legal advice===
:Lawyer Referral Service
:Helps you connect with a lawyer for a complimentary 15-minute consult to see if you want to hire them.
:Call 1-800-663-1919
:[https://www.accessprobono.ca/our-programs/lawyer-referral-service Visit website]


{{Dial-A-Law_Navbox|type=life}}
{{Dial-A-Law Copyright}}
{{Dial-A-Law Copyright}}
{{Dial-A-Law_Navbox|type=rights}}

Latest revision as of 22:54, 7 November 2023

This information applies to British Columbia, Canada. Last reviewed for legal accuracy by Daniel Coles, Owen Bird Law Corporation and Christopher Morcom, Pacific Law Group in February 2022.
Dial-A-Law
Dial-A-Law‎
This page is
from Dial-A-Law‎,
a starting point for
information on the law
in British Columbia.
See the full contents.
About
Introduction
Consumer & Money
Work & Business
Families & Children
Life
Rights & Citizenship
 · Defamation

 · Information & Privacy

 · Human Rights & Discrimination

 · Charter Rights: Overview

 · Charter Rights: Legal Rights

 · Charter Rights: Equality Rights

 · Aboriginal Law

 · Immigrating to BC

 · Seniors' Rights & Elder Abuse
Courts & Crime
From
Visit more from People's Law School
People's Law School
People's Law School
v • d • e

The law of defamation protects a person’s reputation from unjustified harm. Learn what kinds of communication are considered defamatory, as well as the defences to a defamation action.

Common questions

What is defamation?

Defamation is communication about a person that tends to hurt their reputation. It makes people who read or hear the communication think less of that person.

The communication must be made to other people, not just conveyed privately.

If defamation is spoken, it’s called slander. If it’s written, it’s called libel.

The law protects you from defamation. If someone defames you, you can sue them for money (called damages) for harming your reputation.

What kinds of communication can amount to defamation?

To establish a defamation claim, you must show that the communication meets three requirements. You have to show that:

  • the communication was defamatory (that it would tend to lower your reputation in the eyes of a reasonable person),
  • it referred to you, and
  • it was communicated to at least one other person.

Personal insults that only injure your pride normally don’t satisfy this test. But if someone spreads rumours accusing you of a crime, for example, you’d have a much stronger claim that this harms your reputation.

What kinds of damages might be awarded in a defamation lawsuit?

If the person bringing a defamation lawsuit (the “plaintiff”) can prove they were defamed, and the defendant doesn’t have a defence to the claim, a court may award damages for loss of reputation. These are often called general damages.

Awards for general damages vary widely, from a few thousand dollars to tens of thousands of dollars. They depend on several factors, including:

  • the plaintiff’s position and standing in the community,
  • the nature and seriousness of the defamation,
  • the mode and extent of publication,
  • the absence or refusal of any retraction or apology, and
  • the conduct of the defendant from the time of the defamatory statements to judgment.

How widely the remarks were shared is an especially important factor in assessing damages in internet defamation cases.

The plaintiff may also be entitled to special damages, such as lost earnings, but only if they can prove that the lost earnings resulted from the defamatory statement, and not from other factors.

If someone makes defamatory statements with malice, the plaintiff may also be entitled to aggravated or even punitive damages.

For more on how damages work, see our in-depth guidance on defamation.

What’s involved in suing someone for defamation?

In BC, you must bring a defamation lawsuit in BC Supreme Court, not Provincial Court. It must be brought within two years of the defamation. This window of time is the limitation period. The clock begins when the defamatory statement was made or published. To start the lawsuit, you must file documents in court and deliver them to (“serve” them on) the other party. For details, see our information on starting a lawsuit.

Consider alternatives to going to court

Going to BC Supreme Court is expensive. Even if you win, you may spend more on legal fees than you get in damages. A court can award costs to the winner of a lawsuit, but costs cover only a small portion of your full legal costs. If possible, it’s best to resolve the dispute outside of court. See our guidance on alternatives to going to court.

What if someone accuses me of defamation?

To establish a defamation claim, the person accusing you must show that:

  • the communication was defamatory (that it would tend to lower their reputation in the eyes of a reasonable person),
  • it referred to them, and
  • it was communicated to at least one other person.

If your accuser proves these three elements, the onus shifts to you to put up a defence. The following six defences are available to you:

  • Truth, also known as justification, if the defamatory statement is substantially true and you can prove it.
  • Absolute privilege, if the statement is made in certain proceedings (like a lawsuit).
  • Qualified privilege, if the statement is made in performing a public or private duty.
  • Fair comment, if it’s a statement of opinion, based on stated and true facts, on a matter of public interest.
  • Responsible communication on matters of public interest, if the statement concerns a matter of public interest and was made responsibly. This includes being diligent in trying to verify the statement and seeking the other party’s side of the story before circulating it.
  • Innocent dissemination, if the person distributed the defamatory statement unknowingly, and wasn't negligent in not knowing. And they must have immediately removed the statement on learning of the defamation.

For more on each of these defences, see our guidance on if you’ve been accused of defamation.

What is the effect of an apology?

One factor a judge will look at in deciding on a damages award for defamation is whether the person accused later retracted their statements or offered an apology. If they can show they made an effort to walk back their remarks, it’s likely they’ll pay less in damages if the matter goes to court.

But an apology or retraction doesn’t prevent someone from suing for defamation. It just limits the damages.

Explore further

More questions & answers

At a webinar in March 2022, lawyer Daniel Coles answered common questions about defamation, including what it is and what you can do about it.

Who can help

Legal advice

Lawyer Referral Service
Helps you connect with a lawyer for a complimentary 15-minute consult to see if you want to hire them.
Call 1-800-663-1919
Visit website
v • d • e
 
Life
Health
Home & Neighbours
Rights & Citizenship
Wills, Planning & Estates
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International Licence Dial-A-Law © People's Law School is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - ShareAlike 4.0 International Licence.


Retrieved from "https://wiki.clicklaw.bc.ca/index.php?title=Defamation:_Libel_and_Slander&oldid=57270"