Brian Radnoff was recently quoted in the Waterloo Record on the contempt sentencing in Astley v. Verdun. Radnoff recently submitted at a sentencing hearing that only a jail sentence will show the right amount of deterrence for a former newspaper editor who violated an injunction arising out of a defamation action against him.
In early 2013, after a defamation action against him by businessman Robert Astley, Robert Verdun, who describes himself as a corporate governance activist and journalist, was found to be in contempt of a permanent injunction.
At the sentencing hearing, Radnoff (Astley's lawyer) said that Verdun still has not expressed an appropriate amount of remorse for violating an injunction which had ordered him not to criticize Astley over his alleged involvement in the RIM Park financing scandal, reports the Waterloo Record.
In May 2011, a jury found Verdun liable for defamation against Astley and awarded him damages in the amount of $650,000. In June 2011, the trial judge issued an order prohibiting Verdun from "disseminating, posting on the Internet, or publishing in any manner" statements or comments about Astley. In October 2012, Verdun contacted Kitchener Centre MP Stephen Woodworth about Astley, raising an issue that had been one of the subjects of the defamation trial.
Brian Radnoff told the court that Verdun owes Astley almost $900,000 in damages and that Verdun's continual attacks have "caused stress and great expense to Mr. Astley."
Radnoff is urging a jail sentence of 21 days. Verdun's counsel is seeking a fine, probation, community service or house arrest.
Justice Robert Goldstein has adjourned sentencing until Oct. 22.
lerners.ca/articles:commerciallitigation
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
