Wood v. Van Bibber

Wood v. Van Bibber

The trial judge's credibility and factual findings were supported by the evidence; the appellant failed to prove publication of certain alleged statements and, where allegations were made in a workplace investigative or reporting context, those communications were protected by qualified privilege which was not defeated by malice; ineffective assistance of counsel does not justify a retrial in this civil matter; accordingly the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
2013 YKCA 15
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Juanita Wood; Respondent/defendant: Adam Van Bibber; Respondents/defendants: Betty Baptiste; Selkirk First Nation
Court
Yukon Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation / Appeal From Yukon Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Qualified Privilege, Malice, Credibility and Reliability of Witnesses, Standard of Review Palpable and Overriding Error, Ineffective Assistance of Counsel in Civil Proceedings
Source Language
English
Defamation Employment Law Civil Procedure Vicarious Liability Qualified Privilege Malice Credibility and Reliability of Witnesses Standard of Review Palpable and Overriding Error +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 6 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Juanita Wood

Appellant/plaintiff

Adam Van Bibber

Respondent/defendant

Betty Baptiste; Selkirk First Nation

Respondents/defendants

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation / Appeal From Yukon Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether statements alleged to be defamatory were proven to have been made
  2. 2 Whether alleged defamatory statements were protected by qualified privilege
  3. 3 Whether qualified privilege was defeated by malice or by exceeding its scope

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's credibility and factual findings were supported by the evidence; the appellant failed to prove publication of certain alleged statements and, where allegations were made in a workplace investigative or reporting context, those communications were protected by qualified privilege which was not defeated by malice; ineffective assistance of counsel does not justify a retrial in this civil matter; accordingly the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Application to introduce fresh evidence dismissed
  • Appeal dismissed