Defamation cases are funny things: they can take years before a conclusion can be drawn, and it is almost entirely based on circumstantial evidence: what was their intent? Who was present when the statement was made? How do you know their was damage to the company’s or the individuals’ reputation? Are they protected by the Charter based on the circumstances?
I was skimming over my twitter feed, which is basically a daily practice now so I can keep up on current events, I came across this article about Rob Ford, who is the Mayor of Toronto in case any of you were left completely baffled. When I saw the word ‘defamation’ in the first part of the article, I immediately jumped on it, because that just happens to be one of the prominent themes of discussion in my new media class.
From what I can gather, Mayor Rob Ford made a comment about Tuggs Inc., which is a part of Foulidis’ business. According to Foulidis, the comment(s) made by Ford not only made him feel absolutely humiliated, but it also put a dent in his reputation (see CBC article for more details). The comment had something to do with the contract that Foulidis got his hands on in order to expand his business, claiming that he got that contract by means of ‘illegal activity (CBC). It was brought up in court that Foulidis had been involved in some lawsuit’s in the past, which has a bearing on the credibility of his intention to sue Rob Ford for damage to his reputation and that of his business.
There are so many things to consider, like whether or not the comments made by Ford were true, if they were spoken with intentional malice in order to damage Foulidis’ reputation, and which side will have an argument strong enough to hold up in court on Friday.
I’m going to continue to follow this case, to fulfill not just my own personal curiosity, but also because I think the results of this case can tell reveal something about the legal system and how effective it really is in dealing out justice to those who are, at least legally, in the right.
What do you think about this case? Has Rob Ford crossed a line? Could there be some fabrication to Foulidis’ story? What are the important factors to consider? I’m interested to hear what you think.