Globe and Mail Ltd. v. Boland

Globe and Mail Ltd. v. Boland

Qualified privilege does not extend to defamatory newspaper publications about a candidate's fitness for office during an election; as a matter of law the defence of qualified privilege was not available to the defendant and the matter of malice should proceed at new trial under that legal framework.

Citation
[1960] SCR 203
Parties
Defendant Appellant: Globe and Mail Limited; Plaintiff Respondent: John Boland
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 January 1960
Procedural Posture
Libel (defamation) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Ontario; Final Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; order that at the new trial the defence of qualified privilege is not available to the defendant as a matter of law.
Legal Topics
Qualified Privilege, Fair Comment, Malice, Libel, Press Duties
Source Language
English
Torts Defamation Media Law Election Law Qualified Privilege Fair Comment Malice Libel +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 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Globe and Mail Limited

Defendant Appellant

John Boland

Plaintiff Respondent

Procedural Posture

Libel (defamation) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Ontario; Final Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a newspaper publication during an election about a candidate's fitness for office gives rise to an occasion of qualified privilege
  2. 2 Whether there was evidence of express malice to be left to a jury
  3. 3 Proper allocation of burden of proof when qualified privilege is pleaded

Ratio Decidendi

Qualified privilege does not extend to defamatory newspaper publications about a candidate's fitness for office during an election; as a matter of law the defence of qualified privilege was not available to the defendant and the matter of malice should proceed at new trial under that legal framework.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; order that at the new trial the defence of qualified privilege is not available to the defendant as a matter of law.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • At new trial, defence of qualified privilege is not open to the defendant as a matter of law.