McArthur v. Imperial Trust Co. (B.C.), 415. McCallum v. Hurry. Re (Alta.), 533. McRae v. Frooks (Y.T.), 287. Marson v. Grand Trunk Pacific R. W. Co. (Alta.), 693. Mead and City of Moose Jaw, Re (Sask.), 14. Merchants Bank of Canada's Case (Man.), 387. Meunier v. Canadian Northern R. W. Co. (Alta.), 539. Miller v. Moore (Alta.), 548. Montgomery, Re, Lumbers v. Montgomery (Man.), 77. Myers v. Roope (B.C.), 501. Salter and Local Improvement District Schultz v. Lyall-Mitchell Co. (Man.), 103. Smith v. National Trust Co. (Man.), 354. Co. (Alta.), 531. Spencer v. Davidson (Sask.), 574. (Sask.), 179. Stewart v. Marsh (Alta.), 522. Striemer v. Nagel (Man.), 189. Sturgeon v. Starr (Man.), 402. Wheatley v. Wheatley (Man.), 117. Woosnam v. Merchants Bank of Canada (Man.), 40. Wright v. Elliott (Man.), 405. Y. Young Hong v. Macdonald (B.C.), 417. SANDWITH v. COWPER AND GARRIOCH. Libel-Newspaper-Injury to Physician in his Profession -Proof of Registration as Medical Practitioner-Certificate of Registrar of College of Physicians and Surgeons -Production of de Facto Register-Defamatory Words -Inference-Fair Comment-Matter of Public Interest -Facts Alleged not Proved to be True. The plaintiff alleged in his statement of claim that he was a physician duly registered under the Saskatchewan Medical Professions Act, and practising his profession in Saskatchewan, and that he had suffered damage by the defendants publishing in a newspaper a letter which he asserted was a libel on him in his profession. The defendants denied, that the plaintiff was a duly registered medical practitioner; said the words complained of were not defamatory; and, in the alternative, in so far as they consisted of allegations of fact, they were true, and, in so far as they consisted of expressions of opinion, they were fair comments made in good faith and without malice on matters of public interest: Held, that the plaintiff had sufficiently proved his status as a registered medical practitioner by the production of a certificate under the hand of the Registrar of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan, which expressly stated that he was registered, and by the production by the Registrar of the de facto register of the College, upon which the plaintiff's name appeared, although the register was open to some objection as not having been formally accepted by the College Council. Held, as to the merits, that the plain inference from the words published by the plaintiff was, that he had not lived up to the standard of conduct adhered to generally by the medical profession, that he had no respect for himself or his profession, and that his conduct brought disgrace and shame upon the profession; that the words complained of imputed to the plaintiff discreditable conduct in his profession, and were, therefore, libellous. Held, as to the defence that the words were a fair comment on a matter of public interest, that the law requires that the comment must be fair and upon facts which are true; and here no facts were proven to be true which would justify the comments made in the letter; nor was the matter in regard to which the comments were made one of public interest. Mangena v. Wright, [1909] 2 K. B. 976, followed. VOL. XVII. W.L.R. NO. 1—1 Action for libel. J. F. Frame, for the plaintiff. F. W. G. Haultain, K.C., for the defendants. LAMONT, J.:-The plaintiff alleges in his statement of claim that he is a physician duly registered under the Medical Professions Act, and that he is now, and was at the time of the publication of the letter complained of, residing at and practising his profession at Nokomis; that he has suffered damage by the defendants publishing in the "Nokomis Times," a newspaper then belonging to the defendant Garrioch, on the 30th July, 1909, a letter of the defendant Cowper which, he says, is a libel on him in his profession. The defendants in their statement of defence set up the following defences: (1) that the plaintiff was not, at the time of the publication of the alleged libels, a duly registered medical practitioner or entitled to be registered under the Medical Professions Act, nor was he a legally certified medical practitioner; and, in the alternative, if he was registered under the said Act, such registration was made contrary to the provisions of that Act; (2) that the words complained of were not defamatory; and, in the alternative, in so far as they consisted of allegations of fact, they were true, and, in so far as they consisted of expressions of opinion, they were fair comments made in good faith and without malice upon matters of public interest. The plaintiff graduated from Queen's University in April, 1906. Subsequently he passed the Medical State Board of Virginia, and then came to this province. In 1908 he made application to become registered as a member of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of the NorthWest Territories, and on the 6th April of that year he was so registered and received a certificate from the said College that he was entitled to practise medicine in Saskatchewan. He then began the practice of his profession in Nokomis. The Medical Professions Act of this province was placed on the statute-book in 1906, but did not then come into force. By sec. 75 it was enacted that the Act should come into force upon the College of Physicians and Surgeons of the North-West Territories being dissolved and abolished by the order of the Governor in council, as provided by sec. 16, subsec. 3, of the Saskatchewan Act. The College of Physicians and Surgeons of the North-West Territories was not abolished. |