Volpe v. Wong-Tam

Volpe v. Wong-Tam

The appeal is dismissed because the impugned expressions related to matters of public interest and the appellants failed to show grounds to believe the defamation claim lacked a valid defence; the fair comment defence had a real prospect of success and thus the merits hurdle under s.137.1(4)(a) was not met, making dismissal under s.137.1 appropriate.

Citation
2023 ONCA 680
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Joseph Volpe; Plaintiff/appellant: M.T.E.C. Consultants Ltd.; Defendant/respondent: Kristyn Wong-Tam; Defendant/respondent: Paul Ainslie; Defendant/respondent: Yahoo Media Group Inc.; Defendant/respondent: Elizabeth Di Filippo; Defendant/respondent: FreshDaily Inc.; Defendant/respondent: Media Central Corporation Inc.; Defendant/respondent: Enzo DiMatteo; Defendant/respondent: Maria Rizzo; Defendant/respondent: Norm Di Pasquale; Defendant/respondent: Markus de Domenico; Defendant/respondent: Ida Li Preti
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 October 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil (defamation and Related Torts) / Appeal From Order Dismissing Action Under S.137.1 Courts of Justice Act (anti Slapp)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Freedom of Expression, Anti SLAPP (s.137.1), Fair Comment Defence, Qualified Privilege, Statutory Immunity, Responsible Communication, Costs
Source Language
English
Defamation Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Administrative/public Law Freedom of Expression Anti SLAPP (s.137.1) Fair Comment Defence Qualified Privilege +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Volpe

Plaintiff/appellant

M.T.E.C. Consultants Ltd.

Plaintiff/appellant

Kristyn Wong-Tam

Defendant/respondent

Paul Ainslie

Defendant/respondent

Yahoo Media Group Inc.

Defendant/respondent

Elizabeth Di Filippo

Defendant/respondent

FreshDaily Inc.

Defendant/respondent

Media Central Corporation Inc.

Defendant/respondent

Enzo DiMatteo

Defendant/respondent

Maria Rizzo

Defendant/respondent

Norm Di Pasquale

Defendant/respondent

Markus de Domenico

Defendant/respondent

Ida Li Preti

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil (defamation and Related Torts) / Appeal From Order Dismissing Action Under S.137.1 Courts of Justice Act (anti Slapp)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proceeding arises from expression relating to a matter of public interest under s.137.1
  2. 2 Whether appellants established grounds to believe the proceeding has substantial merit under s.137.1(4)(a)(i)
  3. 3 Whether appellants demonstrated the moving parties have no valid defences under s.137.1(4)(a)(ii) (fair comment, justification, qualified privilege, statutory immunity, responsible communication)

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the impugned expressions related to matters of public interest and the appellants failed to show grounds to believe the defamation claim lacked a valid defence; the fair comment defence had a real prospect of success and thus the merits hurdle under s.137.1(4)(a) was not met, making dismissal under s.137.1 appropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Each respondent group (trustees, councillors, and Yahoo respondents) awarded costs of the appeal of $10,000, inclusive of HST and disbursements.