I do not agree. Each defamation case is unique and there is little to be gained by a detailed comparison with other awards: see Hill v. Church of Scientology of Toronto, 1995 CanLII 59 (SCC), [1995] 2 S.C.R. 1130 at para. 187. The trial judge was clearly aware of the various mitigating factors pointed to by the appellants, but also of the attack being directed to AK’s honesty integrity and trustworthiness, the appellant’s deviousness and lack of remorse and the wide circulation of the libel within a relatively small community. In fixing the quantum, the trial judge exercised her discretion in light of these factors and found the appellants equally blameworthy. There is no basis to interfere with her award
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.