Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 13 OCTOBER 2015

Injurious Falsehood

In many cases relating to comparative advertising the plaintiffs have asserted claims for injurious falsehood and unlawful interference with economic relations.

CanadaIntellectual Property

In many cases relating to comparative advertising the plaintiffs have asserted claims for injurious falsehood and unlawful interference with economic relations. In order to succeed with a common law action asserting injurious falsehood the plaintiff must show that:

i) the statement made was false,

ii) the statement was made with intent to cause injury without lawful justification, and

iii) actual economic loss has been suffered as a result of making the statement.

The key to a claim for injurious falsehood is identity. If the plaintiff is not identified in the comparative advertisement there is no tort. However, if the defendant identifies the plaintiff by implication in the offending advertisement this may be sufficient for purposes of such an action.

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