Bardal v the globe and mail
A fascinating case!
"Bardal v. The Globe and Mail" is a landmark Canadian tort law case that was decided in 1960. The case involved a libel lawsuit brought by a woman named Helen Bardal against The Globe and Mail, a prominent Canadian newspaper.
Here's a brief summary of the case:
Helen Bardal was a Toronto socialite who was accused of being involved in a scandalous affair with a married man. The Globe and Mail published an article that repeated these allegations, which damaged Bardal's reputation and caused her emotional distress.
Bardal sued The Globe and Mail for libel, claiming that the article was false and had caused her harm. The newspaper argued that the article was based on a reliable source and that Bardal was a public figure, so she had a lower standard of proof to meet to establish libel.
The Ontario Court of Appeal ultimately ruled in favor of Bardal, finding that the newspaper had indeed libeled her. The court established several important principles in the case, including:
- The "Bardal factors": The court identified four factors that a plaintiff must prove to establish libel:
- The publication was false;
- The publication was communicated to someone other than the plaintiff;
- The publication caused harm to the plaintiff's reputation;
- The publication was not privileged (i.e., it was not a matter of public interest or a fair comment).
- The "public figure" exception: The court held that even public figures like Bardal are entitled to protection from libel, as long as they can prove that the publication was false and caused harm to their reputation.
- The importance of proof: The court emphasized the need for clear and convincing evidence to establish libel, particularly in cases involving public figures.
The Bardal v. The Globe and Mail case has had a lasting impact on Canadian tort law, particularly in the area of libel and defamation. It has been cited in numerous subsequent cases and remains an important reference point for lawyers and judges in Canada.