The Law
|
A recent case demonstrates how small matters and get out of control and lead to exceptional consequences. A dissatisfied customer posted negative reviews on the Internet regarding a house construction job. The rankled contractor sued, claiming defamation. Threatened with an anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) motion to have its action dismissed, the contractor sought to discontinue the action. When the customer/defendant demanded $35,000 in costs as the consequence of a discontinuance the contractor sought to reverse field. Too late. The motion went to a hearing and the judge dismissed the action on the basis that stifling public discussion trumped ruffled private feelings. The judge awarded costs in favour of the customer/defendant in the amount of $164,000! Since the costs order was the reimbursement of the customer’s actual costs of the action the only participants who are assuredly benefited were the lawyers. (Canadian Thermo Windows Inc. v. Seangio, 2021 ONSC 6555 (CanLii)) 
Comments are closed.
|
||