Case information

Torts — Defamation — Defences — Absolute privilege — Applicant suing respondents and alleging that certain statements made by respondents or their counsel were defamatory — Respondents applying to have claim struck for disclosing no viable cause of action — Applications judge striking applicant’s claim and holding that impugned statements were protected by absolute privilege — Chambers judge allowing applicant’s appeal and reinstating applicant’s claim — Court of Appeal allowing respondents’ appeal and striking applicant’s statement of claim.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

The applicant, Ms. Tuharsky, sued the respondents, alleging that certain statements made by the respondents and/or their counsel, in the context of a filed court pleading and during certain hearings to review the accounts of the respondents’ former lawyers, were defamatory. The respondents applied to have the claim struck for disclosing no viable cause of action. An applications judge granted the respondents’ applications and struck Ms. Tuharsky’s claim, holding that the respondents’ impugned statements were protected by “absolute privilege”. A chambers judge at the Court of King’s bench allowed Ms. Tuharsky’s appeal and set aside the first judge’s order, holding that it was not plain and obvious that absolute privilege applied. The Court of Appeal allowed the respondents’ appeal, set aside the chambers judge’s decision, reinstated the first judge’s order, and ordered that Ms. Tuharsky’s statement of claim be struck.