Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 10 MARCH 2014

Merit Consultants International Ltd. v. Chandler, 2012 BCSC 1868

McCarthy Tétrault
McCarthy Tétrault
Contributor
McCarthy Tétrault

McCarthy Tétrault

McCarthy Tétrault LLP provides a broad range of legal services, delivering strategic and...

View firm profile
Explore more from McCarthy Tétrault

In this decision, the British Columbia Supreme Court determined that it is not defamatory for a company to tell its shareholders how it intends to respond to a lawsuit.

CanadaEnergy and Natural Resources

Merit Consultants International Ltd. v. Chandler, 2012 BCSC 1868

In this decision, the British Columbia Supreme Court determined that it is not defamatory for a company to tell its shareholders how it intends to respond to a lawsuit, even if it does not end up responding that way.

In April 2007, Merit Consultants International Ltd. (Merit), an engineering firm, entered into a contract with Redfern Resources Inc. (Redfern), a mining company, under which Merit would become the construction manager at Redfern's site in northwestern B.C. Redfern terminated the contract in March 2008 and Merit sued, seeking damages for breach of contract. Redcorp Ventures Ltd. (Redcorp), Redfern's parent company, issued a news release stating that Redfern would "vigorously defend" Merit's lawsuit and would counterclaim to allege, among other things, negligence by Merit. Redfern eventually did file a counterclaim, but it did not allege negligence.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from