CBC Exposed - serious defamation

Leenen v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp., 2000 CanLII 22380 (ON SC)

In February 1996, the defendant CBC aired a one-hour documentary on the fifth estate on a controversial heart medication known as nifedipine, a calcium channel blocker ("CCB").

The plaintiff agreed to be interviewed for the program. When he asked what topics would be discussed, he was told that the interviewer would be interested in his views on the science of CCBs was well-known within the scientific community. He had written an article in which he concluded that there was clear evidence demonstrating short-term nifedipine to be detrimental to patients with coronary artery disease. The article pointed out that the evidence with respect to the longer acting formulation was limited. The plaintiff provided the CBC with a copy of this article. He gave a lengthy interview in which he discussed the science of CCBs. Most of that interview was not used in the program. The general tenor of the program was that an extremely dangerous drug was being prescribed for unsuspecting heart patients and that the plaintiff defended the drug and accepted perks from a pharmaceutical company.

In light of the systematic reporting of one side of the story, the significant omissions of important information which was contrary to the program's thesis, and the deliberate refraining from making inquiries or allowing the plaintiff a fair opportunity to defend himself, the defendants clearly acted maliciously and in bad faith towards the plaintiff.

When the program was broadcast, the plaintiff was a highly respected research scientist and also carried on an active clinical practice. As a scientist, his integrity and credibility were fundamental to his work. His reputation had been earned over many years and was precious. The program struck at the very core of his being in questioning his scientific credibility, his integrity and his commitment. He was shocked and devastated and felt that his reputation for integrity had been destroyed. It was significant that his accuser was the CBC and not a tabloid to which no one would have paid very much attention. The program reached over a million viewers and a further four hundred thousand when it was rebroadcast on Newsworld. Taking into account the seriousness of the defamation, the breadth of the publication and its source, the republication, the standing of the victim and the nature of his reputation at the time of the broadcast, this was as serious a libel as could be imagined.

Read the full judgement here.