Defamation: Richard Warman vrs. Paul Fromm
[1] In our view the statements complained of
are clearly capable of being defamatory of the respondent.
The trial judge went on to determine that as a matter of
fact they are defamatory of the respondent and there is no
basis for us to interfere with that finding.
[2] As to the defence of fair comment we agree
with the trial judge that it is impossible to distinguish
what might be opinion and what might be fact. The appellant
is unable to show that the statements complained of are
opinion. The trial judge’s use of the word the appellants
“comment” is nothing more than the assertion that what
is complained of is the appellant’s statements.
[3] Without addressing all the other criteria
of the defence, it is clear to us that the trial judge’s
finding of malice is soundly based in the evidence. There is
no basis to interfere with it, and the defence fails.
[4] The appeal must be dismissed. Costs to the
respondent in the sum of $10,000 all inclusive.
[
Index ]
Home ·
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
Search
Nizkor
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012
This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and
to combat hatred.
Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.
As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may
include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and
provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist
and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.
CITATION: Fromm v. Warman, 2008 ONCA 842
DATE: 20081212 DOCKET: C48100
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
Winkler C.J.O., Moldaver and Goudge JJ.A.
BETWEEN:
Paul Fromm and Canadian Association for Free Expression Inc.
Appellants
and
Richard Warman
Respondent
Barbara Kulaszka for the appellants Paul Fromm and Canadian
Association for Free Expression Inc.
Pam MacEachern for the respondent Richard Warman
Heard and endorsed: December 9, 2008
On appeal from the judgment of Justice Monique Metivier of
the Superior Court of Justice dated November 23, 2007.
APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT