Shoprite Stores v. Gardiner

A ground of appeal alleging misdirection by the trial judge that was not stated with reasonable definiteness in the notice of appeal under Rule 323 (Alberta) is not open on appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada; accordingly the alleged misdirections and privilege issues were not grounds for disturbing the verdict and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation: [1935] SCR 637
Parties: Defendants Appellants: Shoprite Stores and Another; Plaintiff Respondent: Robert W. Gardiner
Court: Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 12 February 1935
Procedural Posture: Appeal — Libel (defamation) / Final Hearing on Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Alberta
Legal Topics: Misdirection, Notice of Appeal Requirements (rule 323 Alberta), Privilege (qualified/express Malice), Justification (defence of Truth), Jury Instructions
Source Language: English

Defamation Civil Procedure Evidence Appellate Practice Misdirection Notice of Appeal Requirements (rule 323 Alberta) Privilege (qualified/express Malice) Justification (defence of Truth) +1 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 Party arguments 2

Parties

Shoprite Stores and Another

Defendants Appellants

Robert W. Gardiner

Plaintiff Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal — Libel (defamation) / Final Hearing on Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Alberta

Legal Issues

1 Whether alleged misdirection by trial judge is open on appeal where not stated in the notice of appeal under Rule 323 (Alberta)
2 Whether publication to customers was protected by privilege absent proof of express malice
3 Whether jury should have been instructed that circumstantial evidence alone could support justification