Looking at defamation, employment lawyers outline importance of qualified privilege and need-to-know basis, along with risks of negative feedback and chat apps
“This is a good cautionary tale,” says Richard Johnson, co-founder and partner at Ascent Employment Law in Vancouver.
He’s speaking of a recent case in which an employee sued for defamation after a series of incidents regarding his performance, including notes about his “aggressive behaviour” and the presence of a security guard at the office.
The employee went on to sue for $300 million, but the Supreme Court of British Columbia has now dismissed the claim — subject to appeal — finding the note was protected by qualified privilege.
"The decision was a pretty resounding dismissal of what was a pretty frivolous complaint," says David Fanjoy, a partner in the employment and labour relations group at McMillan in Toronto.
“I think it gives some reassurance to employers and HR staff and managers who might receive these sort of defamation complaints that there is this very legitimate defense of qualified privilege that will defend against a defamation claim.”
The employee, identified only as C.O., joined Workday's Vancouver office as a quality assurance engineer in June 2023. His supervisor and her own supervisor kept a running agenda for their weekly meetings in a shared Google Docs file.
On March 25, 2025, ahead of an in-person performance meeting, his supervisor drafted a message in that...
[OSEN=Seon Mi-kyung Reporter] Rapper Yang Hong-won, who has sparked controversy over infidelity allegations just five days after his marriage, is drawing attention for reportedly singing his wife W...