Radio-Canada loses million-dollar libel suit for reporting on only part of letter

Radio-Canada, the French arm of the public broadcaster, has been ordered by the Supreme Court of Canada to pay about $1.8 million in damages for libeling a Montreal communications consultant. Consultant Gilles Néron was awarded the damages, one of the largest libel awards in the country, in a case that arose from a TV program about 10 years ago. A Quebec organization, the Chambre des Notaires du Québec (CNQ), which decided against taking the case to the Supreme Court, is sharing in the costs. The Supreme Court examined the legality of reporting on private letters, and whether some restriction on freedom of the press is in the public interest. The show that prompted the libel suit reported only on two errors contained in a letter written by Néron. The consultant was asking on behalf of the CNQ for a right to reply to a previous Radio-Canada TV show on the CNQ’s tardiness in paying compensation to victims of wrongdoing by notaries. "Even though N’s handwritten letter cannot be considered private, in focusing only on the two errors in that letter, the second broadcast was misleading, giving the impression that the substance of N’s letter was limited to these two erroneous statements," wrote Justice Louis LeBel for the 6-1 majority in the decision rendered July 29. "The letter discussed other concerns relating to the images of notaries created by the broadcast. A person viewing the report in question would not be aware of these concerns. Nor would the viewer be aware, from the structure of the report, that the letter was really just a request for a meeting and a right of reply. By leaving out vital pieces of information the CBC misrepresented N’s letter as a disingenuous attempt to mislead the CBC, and thereby the public. Moreover, the CBC intentionally and deliberately broadcast the errors in the letter before N could attempt to set things straight." Néron advised the CNQ on how to counteract the negative image of notaries portrayed in Radio-Canada’s Le Point program, which alleged the organization was not paying people promptly. At the request of the CNQ, Néron wrote and personally delivered a note to Radio-Canada asking for a meeting with the producers of the program. But the following day, the CNQ decided not to seek a right of reply. On January 4, 1995, journalist Johanne Faucher contacted the CNQ, which refused her offer of a follow-up interview. She also asked the CNQ about Néron’s letter, and was told it was a personal initiative. Faucher spoke with Néron directly and was told that the CNQ no longer sought a right of reply, and that the letter was nothing more than a request for a right to reply and was not intended for publication. The journalist noted that there were two errors in the letter - the allegation that one of the complainants against the CNQ featured on Le Point was the brother of the criminal Roch Thériault, and that another complainant shown on the show had already been compensated by the CNQ. Néron vowed to check into the mistakes and to get back to Faucher by January 13, 1995. The letter also contained other information, such as Néron saying that he personally found the Radio-Canada report to be accurate for the most part. But on January 12, Néron learned that the letter was the subject of a report to be broadcast that evening. The TV report was crafted as a response to Néron’s letter, and it quoted the two mistakes in the letter. Afterward, a rash of letters were received from notaries expressing indignation and dismay over the communication policies of the CNQ. The CNQ did not contact Néron, but the next day issued a release signed by its president hat was circulated to all notaries and professional corporations, the media, the Minister of Justice and others distancing itself from Néron (CCR Update, Feb. 18/04). One of the first steps in Néron’s legal fight was filing a complaint with CBC ombudsman, Mario Cardinal. He dismissed four of the grievances laid out by Néron, but acknowledged one. "The January 12 broadcast seriously compromised the principle of fairness by failing to mention the five grievances that are central to your letter and only reporting on the two errors," noted Cardinal. "It might have been expected that the ‘errors’ you accused them of making would be looked at one by one in the program and that the point of view you expressed would be reflected impartially, thereby treating your criticism fairly and with dignity." Before the case found its way to the Supreme Court, two lower courts had already ruled that Radio-Canada was wrong to broadcast the contents of the letter without Néron’s consent. Dissenting judge J. Binnie, however, could not agree. "…While the second broadcast ought to have presented N’s letter in a more complete and balanced fashion, the lack of balance did not subvert the truth of the real matter of interest to the public, namely the truth of CNQ’s allegations pertaining to the complainants," he wrote. Binnie also states that while N ought to have been given time to verify the errors in his letter, the allegations against the complainants were false, whether they were verified or not. He also writes that Radio-Canada was entitled to consider the information it had received to be public. Furthermore, Binnie said that the criticism of some aspects of the second broadcast by the CBC’s ombudsman cannot be equated with a finding of civil fault.

Radio-Canada loses million-dollar libel suit for reporting on only part of letter

Broadcast | August 17, 2004

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us