Jerome v. Anderson et al.

Jerome v. Anderson et al.

The trial judge's finding of express malice by Anderson was supported by the evidence (including Anderson's own unexplained statement and lack of investigation), which destroyed any qualified privilege; therefore the Court of Appeal erred in disturbing the trial judgment and the plaintiff is entitled to recover increased damages of $30,712 from Anderson and the Saskatchewan Power Corporation.

Citation
[1964] SCR 291
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Levi J. Jerome; Respondent/defendant: Donald J. Anderson; Respondent/defendant: David Cass-Beggs; Respondent/defendant: Saskatchewan Power Corporation
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 March 1964
Procedural Posture
Tort — Libel/defamation / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of Court of Appeal set aside; trial judgment restored and varied to award plaintiff $30,712 against Anderson and Saskatchewan Power Corporation; action against Cass-Beggs dismissed without costs.
Legal Topics
Qualified Privilege, Express Malice, Justification, Order of Evidence, Cross Examination, Damages
Source Language
English
Torts Defamation Evidence Employment Law Civil Procedure Qualified Privilege Express Malice Justification +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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Levi J. Jerome

Appellant/plaintiff

Donald J. Anderson

Respondent/defendant

David Cass-Beggs

Respondent/defendant

Saskatchewan Power Corporation

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Tort — Libel/defamation / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a dismissal letter accusing employee of lack of integrity amounted to defamatory publication; whether qualified privilege applies and if it was destroyed by express malice
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge properly exercised discretion to allow the plaintiff to reserve rebuttal evidence and to limit cross-examination accordingly
  3. 3 Whether the Court of Appeal should overturn trial judge's credibility findings and factual conclusions on malice

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's finding of express malice by Anderson was supported by the evidence (including Anderson's own unexplained statement and lack of investigation), which destroyed any qualified privilege; therefore the Court of Appeal erred in disturbing the trial judgment and the plaintiff is entitled to recover increased damages of $30,712 from Anderson and the Saskatchewan Power Corporation.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of Court of Appeal set aside; trial judgment restored and varied to award plaintiff $30,712 against Anderson and Saskatchewan Power Corporation; action against Cass-Beggs dismissed without costs.

Orders

  • Set aside judgment of the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan
  • Restore trial judgment subject to variation: plaintiff to recover $30,712 from Donald J. Anderson and Saskatchewan Power Corporation