Leslie v. The Canadian Press

Leslie v. The Canadian Press

Under s.28(1) the appellant need only show the misdirection may have affected the verdict; if the appellate court is in doubt the respondent must show no effect. Here the jury's answers distinguished truth from reporting and found the statements substantially true; the record shows no substantial wrong or miscarriage resulted from the imperfect charge, so the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
[1956] SCR 871
Parties
Plaintiff, Appellant: George A. Leslie; Defendant, Respondent: The Canadian Press
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 October 1956
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation (libel) Appeal / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed
Legal Topics
Justification, Fair and Accurate Report Privilege, Misdirection, New Trial, Burden of Proof Under Judicature Act S.28(1)
Source Language
English
Defamation Torts Civil Procedure Appeal Justification Fair and Accurate Report Privilege Misdirection New Trial +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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George A. Leslie

Plaintiff, Appellant

The Canadian Press

Defendant, Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation (libel) Appeal / On Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a misdirection to a jury requires the appellant to show it actually affected the verdict or only that it may have affected the verdict
  2. 2 Whether the published article was justified (true) and/or a fair and accurate report of judicial proceedings and thus privileged
  3. 3 Whether any misdirection occasioned a substantial wrong or miscarriage under s.28(1) of the Judicature Act

Ratio Decidendi

Under s.28(1) the appellant need only show the misdirection may have affected the verdict; if the appellate court is in doubt the respondent must show no effect. Here the jury's answers distinguished truth from reporting and found the statements substantially true; the record shows no substantial wrong or miscarriage resulted from the imperfect charge, so the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed