Background
The plaintiff Henry Aukema brought a defamation action against three defendants, alleging they made false statements to police accusing him of serious criminal conduct. The parties jointly moved for determination of a legal question by special case under Rule 22 of the Rules of Civil Procedure. They sought an appellate ruling on whether initial reports to law enforcement alleging criminal activity are protected by absolute privilege, which would result in automatic dismissal of the defamation claim. The parties agreed that this legal question was outcome-determinative of the entire defamation action.
The defendants relied on an English decision (Westcott v. Westcott) that extended absolute privilege to oral complaints to police, arguing this Court had not explicitly resolved the issue. However, prior Ontario decisions—notably Cusson v. Quan and Marcellin v. London Police Services Board—had treated police complaints as covered by qualified privilege rather than absolute privilege.
The Court’s Holding
Justice Thorburn dismissed the special case motion, finding that none of the three prerequisites in Rule 22.03(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure were satisfied. The rule requires that special cases raise either conflicting Superior Court decisions with no appellate guidance, conflicts between appellate courts in Ontario and other provinces, or a contention that an existing appellate decision should not be followed. The Court held that existing Ontario law was not ambiguous on this point: prior appellate decisions in Cusson and Marcellin had conclusively established that complaints to police are covered by qualified privilege, not absolute privilege.
Even if the prerequisites had been met, Justice Thorburn stated she would decline to exercise discretion to grant the special case. Special cases before the Court of Appeal are rare, and this action lacked the “tortured and lengthy procedural history” that justified the special case in Taylor v. Canada (a 20-year-old action with 30 other cases awaiting resolution). Additionally, the parties had not set out sufficient agreed material facts necessary to answer the legal question, as required by Rule 22.04(a).
Key Takeaways
- Initial complaints to police are protected by qualified privilege, not absolute privilege, under established Ontario law; this protection can be defeated by proof of malice or recklessness as to falsity.
- Special cases before the Court of Appeal are reserved for exceptional circumstances involving clear conflicts in jurisprudence, lengthy procedural histories, or multiple cases waiting for resolution.
- Parties seeking to invoke Rule 22.03 must identify actual conflicts between courts, not merely seek clarification or reconsideration of settled law.
- Rule 22.04 requires parties to set out agreed material facts; failure to do so may result in the Court’s refusal to answer the legal question posed.
Why It Matters
This decision reinforces a critical balance in defamation law: while citizens and victims are encouraged to report crimes to police through qualified privilege protection, that protection does not constitute a blanket immunity from defamation liability. The qualified privilege can be defeated through proof of malice, ensuring that false or recklessly made accusations remain actionable. This approach protects both the public interest in crime reporting and private individuals’ reputations.
The decision also clarifies the proper use of special cases before appellate courts, establishing that they are not a vehicle for re-examining settled law or seeking appellate clarification of existing principles. By requiring strict procedural prerequisites and a genuine conflict in jurisprudence, the Court preserves judicial resources and maintains the trial court as the appropriate forum for first-instance legal determinations unless truly exceptional circumstances warrant appellate intervention.
✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.