How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Legal Ease Your Own Question
Legal Ease
Legal Ease, Lawyer
Category: Canada Law
Satisfied Customers: 95911
Experience:  Lawyer
Type Your Canada Law Question Here...
Legal Ease is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

We wrote an article (See attached file to article, and read

Customer Question

We wrote an article (See attached file for link to article, and read it, please). Now, in response to this article, YAC sent the following statement (Read it below this paragraph). TAG is unhappy about that statement and claims it is actionable because YAC said "Mr. Gilcig is entitled to his opinion regarding YAC, but it does not jive with the facts" because it implies mr. gilcig is lying. Is this actionable or not?
----------Statemen from YAC----------
"YAC is saddened at the loss of a 30+ year art venue in Cornwall. The artscape of Cornwall is diminished by its closing. Unequivocally, as with any corporate entity, responsibility for this loss lies solely in the hands of the institution's management, who by accepting their roles as the leaders and decision makers for TAG, must also bear the responsibility for the consequences of the decisions they have made and actions they have taken. The notion that YAC or Focus Art or the City of Cornwall or any other entity can somehow be held responsible for the consequences of the decisions and actions of TAG and its management team is ludicrous. The picketers Mr. Gilcig refers to were not just from Focus Art, but represented the entire SD&G art community. It was a message of support by the art community for the institution - they wouldn't bother to picket if they didn't care.
Mr. Gilcig is entitled to his opinion regarding YAC, but it does not jive with the facts. YAC has helped TAG to the tune of $18,000 in the form of facilitating a successful OTF grant to upgrade their lighting. We have expressed to their board on many occasions our willingness to help. On one occasion last year, at our urging, the YAC council met with Jamie, Wyatt, and the TAG board specifically to explore how we could help. Wyatt, then President of the TAG board, informed us that if they needed our help they would ask. YAC has fulfilled every non-monetary request since then.
Once again, we are saddened to see TAG close. We are however confident that others will rise to fill the void left by its loss and we look forward to working with them to ensure effective, sustainable, and inclusive art spaces for our city and it's artists."
Submitted: 4 months ago.
Category: Canada Law
Expert:  Legal Ease replied 4 months ago.

Was there any lie in the statement at all? Or is everything either the truth or an opinion?

Customer: replied 4 months ago.

Here's the link to the article. Please read.

Customer: replied 4 months ago.

I don't know. There's no way for me to prove if it's true or not. It's TAG's recollection of things against YAC's recollection of things. They're the only ones who know the truth.

Expert:  Legal Ease replied 4 months ago.

I cannot know what could happen if there is a lawsuit as this will turn on the facts.

Essentially, it is not defamation if the facts are true and not lies and it is not defamation if someone has an opinion and expresses it. Their opinion can be completely unfair and irrational but if it's an opinion it is not defamation. I can say I think that man is a dishonest liar and it is not defamation. But I cannot say that man is a dishonest liar if I cannot prove that is the case.

Do you see what I mean?

Related Canada Law Questions