Categories
Brandon Blog Post

UNVEILING THE RUDY GIULIANI LEGAL PUZZLE: A MASSIVE RUDY GIULIANI-STYLE DEBT CHALLENGE IN CANADIAN BANKRUPTCY LAWS!

Rudy Giuliani: Introduction

Rudolph Giuliani, formerly revered as a prominent figure in American governance for his commendable response during the September 11th attacks, has encountered a series of legal predicaments in recent times. Notably, his entanglement in the Ukraine scandal on behalf of Donald Trump to discredit Hunter Biden and his father Joe Biden, which led to the first impeachment of President Trump. From there, Rudy Giuliani, on behalf of Donald Trump, embraced all the conspiracy theories with his active role in disseminating baseless election claims and election-denier allegations of electoral malpractice during the 2020 Presidential election because of Trump’s election loss. These have significantly marred Giuliani’s once esteemed standing.

Rudy Giuliani’s post-election activities following Donald Trump’s loss in the 2020 election have stirred significant controversy. The actions taken by Giuliani against individuals such as Freeman and Moss have led to legal repercussions and personal ramifications. Understanding the sequence of events provides insight into the aftermath of the false allegations and subsequent legal proceedings.

Now, given the multiple lawsuits and legal challenges, Giuliani has filed for bankruptcy to escape accountability for his actions. However, it is important to note that his US Chapter 11 bankruptcy is not a foolproof method to avoid legal consequences.

In this Brandon’s Blog, I will also look at this from the perspective of what would be the case if Rudy Giuliani was Canadian.

Rudy Giuliani’s False Allegations

After the contentious 2020 election, 79-year-old Giuliani, a prominent figure in Trump’s legal team, made false claims and damaging statements about two Georgia election workers, Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss. These unfounded allegations attacked their character and integrity, creating controversy and misinformation. The impact of Giuliani’s words reverberated through the media and public consciousness, tarnishing the reputation and physical safety of Freeman and Moss.

In response to the baseless claims made by Giuliani, Ruby Freeman and Wandrea’ ArShaye (“Shaye”) Moss took legal action by filing a defamation lawsuit. The lawsuit aimed to hold Giuliani accountable for his reckless statements and the resulting harm caused to their reputation.

A picture of Donald Trump's former lawyer, Rudy Giuliani after he filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection
Rudy Giuliani

After the due legal process in the defamation trial, a default judgment was issued in favour of Freeman and Moss, highlighting the severity of Giuliani’s bad faith actions and the court’s acknowledgment of the harm inflicted. A jury awarded Freeman and Moss over $148M in damages from Rudy Giuliani, including $75M in punitive damages, $33,169,000 in defamation damages, and $40M in total damages for infliction of emotional distress. The defamation lawsuit sought to restore the damaged reputation of Freeman and Moss. The default judgment and jury award underscored the gravity of Giuliani’s false allegations. Legal recourse was instrumental in addressing the defamation and seeking justice for the impacted parties.

Explanation of why Rudy Giuliani filed for bankruptcy

Following the issuance of the default judgment and the jury award in favour of Freeman and Moss, Rudy Giuliani’s legal troubles escalated. Just three days after the final judgment was entered, Giuliani unexpectedly decided to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Giuliani’s bankruptcy filing added another layer of complexity to the already tumultuous legal saga. The decision to file for bankruptcy so soon after the judgment raised eyebrows and sparked speculation about Giuliani’s financial state and made many suspect that he was in a state of financial ruin.

The timing of Giuliani’s bankruptcy filing about the legal ruling underscored the interconnected web of consequences resulting from his false allegations. The filing hinted at potential financial repercussions for Giuliani and opened avenues for further examination of his actions.

Definition of bankruptcy protection and how it can help individuals in financial distress

A picture of Donald Trump's former lawyer, Rudy Giuliani after he filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection
Rudy Giuliani

Bankruptcy is a legal process that allows individuals or businesses to seek relief from their debts and reorganize their finances. While filing for bankruptcy can provide temporary protection from creditors and halt legal actions, it does not erase all obligations or shield individuals from all types of legal liabilities. Bankruptcy allows honest but unfortunate debtors to discharge themselves of their debts in return for surrendering most of their assets to the Trustee.

The Rudy Giuliani Bankruptcy Protection and its Limitations

In Giuliani’s case, bankruptcy may not protect him from lawsuits related to his alleged involvement in various illegal activities. If he is found guilty of misconduct, bankruptcy will not absolve him of criminal or civil penalties. Additionally, bankruptcy courts have the authority to reject deemed abusive or fraudulent filings.

Moreover, Giuliani’s reputation and standing in the legal community, whatever is left of it, may suffer further by his using his Chapter 11 bankruptcy to evade accountability. Ultimately, using bankruptcy as a strategy to escape legal accountability is not a guaranteed solution. Giuliani must face the consequences of his actions and address the legal challenges against him transparently and responsibly. Only by taking accountability for his actions can he begin to rebuild his reputation and credibility in the eyes of the public and the legal system.

The Allegations Against Rudy Giuliani

Giuliani’s purported defamation campaign has garnered widespread attention and scrutiny, leading to a legal showdown that could reshape the contours of US bankruptcy law. The lawsuit argues that the damage inflicted by Giuliani was not incidental but calculated, seeking to tarnish the reputation and livelihood of the plaintiff.

The allegations against Giuliani paint a compelling narrative of deliberate harm and a blatant disregard for the consequences of his actions. Such intentional and malicious conduct, if proven, could have significant ramifications on the dischargeability of debts incurred as a result. In essence, the lawsuit thrusts the spotlight on the intersection of personal liability and financial obligations in a high-stakes legal arena.

A significant legal battle unfolded in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, revolving around the dischargeability of debt in a high-profile case involving former New York City mayor, Rudy Giuliani. The lawsuit focuses on the implications of Giuliani’s alleged defamation campaign and raises crucial questions about the nature of the debts incurred. Let’s delve deeper into the details of this complex legal dispute.

A picture of Donald Trump's former lawyer, Rudy Giuliani after he filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection
Rudy Giuliani

The core of the lawsuit lies in the determination of whether the debts stemming from Giuliani’s actions are dischargeable under U.S. bankruptcy law. The plaintiff has taken the stance that Giuliani’s defamation campaign was not just a casual misstep but a willful and malicious injury, causing severe harm and repercussions. Giuliani has stated that he intends to appeal the defamation verdict, to get the relief granted to Freeman and Moss substantially lowered.

The Unforgiving Nature of U.S. Bankruptcy Law

Under U.S. bankruptcy law, debts arising from willful and malicious injuries are subject to special treatment, reflecting the seriousness with which such actions are viewed. The rationale behind this provision is to prevent wrongdoers from evading accountability through the shelter of bankruptcy, ensuring that victims are not deprived of recourse and justice.

Debts stemming from intentional torts, such as defamation, fall within this category of nondischargeable obligations, highlighting the stringent standards applied in such cases. The law recognizes the inherent harm caused by deliberate misconduct and aims to uphold the principles of fairness and justice in the realm of debt resolution.

The lawsuit represents a crucial juncture in the legal landscape, setting a precedent for similar cases in the future. It underscores the importance of accountability and responsibility in the realm of public statements and actions. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for how defamation and intentional harm are treated in bankruptcy proceedings.

Giuliani’s debt represents more than a financial obligation; it is a tangible symbol of the repercussions he must bear for his intentional and malicious conduct. The pursuit of non-dischargeability underscores the gravity of his actions and the commitment to holding him answerable for the harm caused. It serves as a potent reminder that accountability transcends monetary concerns, encompassing the broader spectrum of ethical and moral responsibilities.

Rudy Giuliani’s Bankruptcy Implications and Beyond

The outcome of this lawsuit has the potential to shape the legal landscape surrounding the dischargeability of debts in cases involving intentional harm. It raises fundamental questions about the boundaries of free speech, the responsibilities of public figures, and the consequences of malign actions.

A picture of Donald Trump's former lawyer, Rudy Giuliani after he filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection
Rudy Giuliani

As the legal proceedings unfold, the intricacies of the case will be scrutinized, setting a precedent that could reverberate across similar disputes. Ultimately, the lawsuit encapsulates the inherent tension between individual rights and societal interests, underscoring the complexities of balancing personal freedoms with the consequences of one’s actions. Stay tuned as this legal saga unfolds and sheds light on the intricate tapestry of law, ethics, and justice.

Rudy Giuliani Bankruptcy: What If Rudy Giuliani Was a Canadian Living In Toronto, Ontario Canada

What is defamation in Canada?

In Canada, defamation is any intentional or negligent false communication, whether written or spoken, that harms a person’s reputation or exposes them to ridicule, belittling, or contempt. The concept of defamation can have two possible parts; libel and slander. There is a distinction between libel and slander.

Libel is defamation either in writing or some other permanent form, while slander is defamation that is not left permanently. Section 298(1) of the Canadian Criminal Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46) defines a defamatory libel as any published material that is likely to injure someone’s reputation or make them the object of hatred, contempt, or ridicule, without lawful justification or excuse. Slander is more commonly associated with an oral statement. With slander, there generally will always be a fight waged between slander and freedom of speech.

Defamation is an act of harming the reputation of another person through a false statement or many of them. In the real world, defamation can lead to severe consequences, including damages to one’s reputation and livelihood. The criminal code and being found guilty of the criminal offence of criminal defamation is one thing. But in the real world, the possibility of imprisonment is not going to provide any real satisfaction to the wronged party. The way to get compensated for the suffered damages because of the defamation of character is to start a civil suit action for a defamation claim.

Are All Debts Discharged Through A Canadian Bankruptcy

To see if all potential debts can be discharged through bankruptcy, we need to look at section 178(1) of the BIA. This section enumerates the debts that are not released by an order of discharge from bankruptcy. As you may recall from earlier Brandon’s Blogs, I have explained that it is not the bankruptcy itself that clears a person’s debts, it is the discharge from bankruptcy.

Notwithstanding that a discharge from bankruptcy is what clears out a person’s debts, the BIA lists several specific debts that cannot be released by an order of discharge. I looked at the list contained in section 178(1) and there is only 1 item that relates to judgment debts. That is section 178(1)(a.1) which reads as follows:

(a.1) any award of damages by a court in civil proceedings in respect of

    • (i) bodily harm intentionally inflicted, or sexual assault, or
    • (ii) wrongful death resulting therefrom;

A person’s bankruptcy discharge releases them from all claims provable in bankruptcy that are not listed in section 178(1). The question is, does a Rudy Giuliani-type judgment award for damages in defamation cases survive the bankruptcy of the party against whom the judgment is?

For that claim to survive the person’s bankruptcy, the judgment creditor offended party would have to show that:

  1. the award of damages is for bodily harm; and
  2. was intentionally inflicted.

When it comes to the tort of intentional infliction of bodily harm, the law does not recognize any mental states that fall short of a provable injury. The requirements for this tort are:

  • The defendant’s conduct must have been extreme and outrageous.
  • The defendant must have intentionally or recklessly caused the plaintiff emotional distress.
  • The plaintiff must have suffered a visible and provable injury as a result of the defendant’s conduct.

Therefore, it is not a clear-cut answer if the Freeman and Moss judgment award would survive a Canadian bankruptcy protection filing. They would have to prove having suffered a visible and provable injury. Cleary being scared to step outside your home and being unable to work could very well be the kind of injury that would make the debt for such an award not dischargeable in a Canadian bankruptcy protection filing. An award for infliction of emotional distress and loss of reputation could very well be discharged through a Canadian bankruptcy protection filing.

Rudy Giuliani: Conclusion

I will be watching closely the ongoing case of Rudy Giuliani and his U.S. Bankruptcy filing. As individuals navigating the complex world of personal finances, it is crucial to be aware of the legal framework surrounding Canadian bankruptcy protection. Understanding the Canadian bankruptcy legislation and the authority and discretion of the courts empowers us to make informed financial decisions and ensures the integrity of the bankruptcy system.

Individuals and business owners must take proactive measures to address financial difficulties, consumer debt and company debt and promptly seek assistance when necessary. It is crucial to recognize that financial stress is a prevalent concern and seeking help is a demonstration of fortitude, rather than vulnerability. Should you encounter challenges in managing your finances and find yourself burdened by stress, do not delay in pursuing aid.

Revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing people, entrepreneurs and their companies and businesses with debt problems that are in financial distress. Are you now worried about just how you or your business are going to survive? Are you worried about what your fiduciary obligations are and not sure if the decisions you are about to make are the correct ones to avoid personal liability? Those concerns and more associated with your company debt are obviously on your mind.

The Ira Smith Team understands these financial health concerns. More significantly, we know the requirements of the business owner or the individual who has way too much financial debt. You are trying to manage these difficult financial problems and you are understandably anxious.

It is not your fault you can’t fix this problem on your own and it does not mean that you are a bad person. The pandemic has thrown everyone a curveball. We have not been trained to deal with this. You have only been taught the old ways. The old ways do not work anymore.

The Ira Smith Team uses innovative and cutting-edge methodologies, to adeptly navigate you through the intricacies of your financial challenges, ensuring a resolution to your debt-related predicaments without resorting to the rigours of the bankruptcy process. We can get you debt relief now!

We have helped many entrepreneurs and their insolvent companies who thought that consulting with a Trustee and receiver meant their company would go bankrupt. On the contrary. We helped turn their companies around through financial restructuring.

We look at your whole circumstance and design a strategy that is as distinct as you are. We take the load off of your shoulders as part of the debt settlement strategy we will draft just for you.

The Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. team understands that people facing money problems require a lifeline. That is why we can establish a restructuring procedure for you and end the discomfort you feel.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation. We will listen to the unique issues facing you and provide you with practical and actionable ideas you can implement right away to end the pain points in your life, to begin your debt-free life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

A picture of Donald Trump's former lawyer, Rudy Giuliani after he filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection
Rudy Giuliani

 

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

DEFAMATION TO CHARACTER: THE BANKRUPTCY INFORMATION YOU NEED TO AVOID PAYING A JOHNNY DEPP-AMBER HEARD EXPENSIVE JUDGMENT

What is defamation to character?

In Canada, defamation is any intentional or negligent false communication, whether written or spoken, that harms a person’s reputation or exposes them to ridicule, belittling, or contempt. The concept of defamation can have two possible parts; libel and slander. There is a distinction between libel and slander.

Libel is defamation either in writing or some other permanent form, while slander is defamation that is not left in a permanent way. Section 298(1) of the Canadian Criminal Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46) defines a defamatory libel as any published material that is likely to injure someone’s reputation or make them the object of hatred, contempt, or ridicule, without lawful justification or excuse. Slander is more commonly associated with an oral statement. With slander, there generally will always be a fight waged between slander and freedom of speech.

Unless you have been living under a rock for the past few months, you have no doubt “heard” about, and maybe even followed, the sensational legal case of John C. Depp, II v. Amber Laura Heard. Amber Laura Heard was sued for defamation to character by Johnny Depp, who claimed US$50 million in damages, in a trial that began on April 11 and ended on June 1, 2022, in Fairfax County, Virginia.

Johnny Depp married Amber Heard in 2015, but their partnership has actually been shrouded in conflict since the beginning. Heard accused Depp of domestic abuse and they broke up in 2016. Their divorce was all settled in 2017. The jury’s ruling in favour of Johnny Depp ordered Amber Heard to pay the actor $15 million in damages for defamation. The seven-person jury also decided that Depp through his lawyer had defamed Heard on one of three counts in her countersuit, ordering him to pay $2 million.

Defamation in the Real World

Defamation is an act of harming the reputation of another person through a false statement or many of them. In the real world, defamation can lead to severe consequences, including damages to one’s reputation and livelihood. The criminal code and being found guilty of the criminal offence of criminal defamation is one thing. But in the real world, the possibility of imprisonment is not going to provide any real satisfaction to the wronged party. The way to get compensated for the suffered damages because of the defamation to character is to start a civil suit action for a defamation claim.

The jury awarded Johnny Depp $15 million in damages against Amber Heard for defamation to character, but she will only have to pay $10.35 million due to a Virginia law capping punitive damages. One little problem. According to her lawyer, Amber Heard does not have the means to pay $10.35 million in damages to her ex-husband Johnny Depp following their trial verdict in the defamation lawsuit.

After hearing of the verdict, it got me thinking. If this kind of award was handed down here from Canadian defamation actions, could the party who was found guilty of such defamation of character and now had a huge judgment against them, could they use the Canadian insolvency system to get out of paying that kind of judgment coming out of an action for defamation?

The answer is maybe! In this Brandon’s Blog, I take a look at defamation as one of the civil torts that someone would have a civil cause of action for. I then look at what would happen to the person who was found guilty in a civil suit for a defamatory allegation if they looked to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) to try to get out of paying that kind of judgment.

defamation to character
defamation to character

Does defamation to character, libel and slander judgment claim survive in a Canadian bankruptcy?

To see if a claim can be discharged through bankruptcy, we need to look at section 178(1) of the BIA. This section enumerates the debts that are not released by an order of discharge from bankruptcy. As you may recall from earlier Brandon’s Blogs, I have explained that it is not the bankruptcy itself that clears a person’s debts, it is the discharge from bankruptcy.

Notwithstanding that a discharge from bankruptcy is what clears out a person’s debts, the BIA lists several specific debts that cannot be released by an order of discharge. I looked at the list contained in section 178(1) and there is only 1 item that relates to judgment debts. That is section 178(1)(a.1) which reads as follows:

(a.1) any award of damages by a court in civil proceedings in respect of

    • (i) bodily harm intentionally inflicted, or sexual assault, or
    • (ii) wrongful death resulting therefrom;

A person’s bankruptcy discharge releases them from all claims provable in bankruptcy that are not listed in section 178(1). The question is, does Johnny Depp – Amber Heard type judgment awards for damages in defamation cases survive the bankruptcy of the party against who the judgment is?

In order for that claim to survive the person’s bankruptcy, the judgment creditor offended party would have to show that:

  1. the award of damages is for bodily harm; and
  2. was intentionally inflicted.

My research includes 3 court decisions that I believe clearly lay out how defamation to character judgment claims are handled in the Canadian bankruptcy context and whether such a claim survives a person’s bankruptcy. The cases are:

I will explain the main findings and general themes running through each case that seems to answer the question as to is defamation to character judgment claim is eliminated by a person’s discharge from bankruptcy? Put another way, if this was a Canadian case, could Amber Heard get out from under this judgment claim by filing either an assignment in bankruptcy or a restructuring proposal under the BIA?

I will focus on the bankruptcy aspect. The simple answer for a restructuring proposal under the BIA is that a successfully completed restructuring proposal would eliminate such a judgment claim. The real issue is what would happen in a bankruptcy.

defamation to character
defamation to character

Can I file defamation to character lawsuit against someone?

That is exactly what happened in Ross (Re). In the 2014 Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench Ross (Re) decision, the question the Registrar in Bankruptcy needed to answer was “What is the appropriate disposition of the bankruptcy discharge application given the unique circumstances of this bankruptcy?” The Registrar started with the premise that it is more reprehensible to make a bankruptcy assignment with the purpose of avoiding a judgment creditor’s claim than to make a bankruptcy assignment to avoid general commercial debts.

The Registrar said that a bankrupt person’s civil judgment history may be relevant in deciding what conditions to put on that person’s bankruptcy discharge. The court determined that Mr. Ross filed for bankruptcy to avoid paying the creditor’s damage award under defamation laws. There were only two claims admitted in the bankruptcy for dividend purposes: the defamation judgment claim of $92,183 and a claim for $965.83 from a credit card issuer for a total of $93,148.83.

In this case, the Registrar did not look at all as to whether the judgment claim was of a kind that would survive Mr. Ross’ bankruptcy discharge. Rather, it was looked at only from what is an appropriate condition to place on Mr. Ross for his discharge from bankruptcy. The Registrar decided that a condition that Mr. Ross pays the amount of $34,000 or 37% of the proven claims in order to obtain his bankruptcy discharge.

Can you tell me how to file defamation to character lawsuit when the proposed defendant files bankruptcy?

This was not the main issue in this January 2019 British Columbia court decision in Burke v. Red Barn at Mattick’s Ltd. This case does not deal with defamation to character, but rather, is an analysis of section 178(1) of the BIA and particularly subsection (a.1) stating that any award of damages by a court in civil proceedings for bodily harm intentionally inflicted, sexual assault or wrongful death resulting therefrom cannot be discharged through bankruptcy proceedings.

As I previously stated, this is the section that a successful plaintiff who gets a civil judgment in defamation to character lawsuit would rely upon to have their debt survive a defendant’s bankruptcy. So the analysis this British Columbia court Judge goes through is instructive.

This case revolved around a proposed class action which stated that Mr. Schwabe, a former employee invaded the privacy of female employees by recording them without permission while they were changing in and using the restroom. The former employee then filed for bankruptcy, so the plaintiffs requested a declaration from the court to allow the plaintiffs to continue with their proposed class proceeding against him.

The BIA’s section 69.4 automatically halts any legal proceedings related to debts when an insolvency filing is made. No legal action to establish or collect a debt can continue or begin without the court’s permission. If a creditor thinks that a stay of proceedings would unfairly affect them, they can ask the court for a declaration that the stay no longer applies to them. The court can decide to grant this request if it feels that the creditor is likely to be disadvantaged by the stay continuing.

The Judge went through a thoughtful analysis of prior court decisions across Canada. The Judge acknowledged that an applicant under s. 69.4 must demonstrate to the court that at least one of these grounds is present:

  1. Actions for debts that cannot be discharged through bankruptcy.
  2. Actions involving complex, contingent, or unliquidated debts that cannot be valued by the Trustee alone under the BIA.
  3. Actions where the bankrupt party is necessary for complete adjudication of the matter involving others.

The Judge said that going ahead with proceedings after a bankruptcy filing is an unusual situation. He added that simply having a claim listed in the paperwork is not enough to merit an exemption from the stay. To be given an exemption, there must be convincing evidence, a reasonable ground, to show that there is a chance the claim could be successful.

The Court had to take many different factors into account when making its decision in this case. One was if the plaintiff group was successful in obtaining a judgment against the bankrupt individual, would the debt be one that a discharge would not be a defence against? The section we would look to for a judgment for a debt under defamation laws due to defamation to character is the same – “bodily harm intentionally inflicted”.

The damage award to be exempt from discharge under this part of s. 178(1) must be for bodily harm resulting from an act done with the specific intent to injure. The Court’s decision acknowledged that:

  • The non-consensual distribution of intimate images by the bankrupt carries with it the risk of psychological hardship and embarrassment to the victims of such crimes.
  • Some people who have had their private images shared online without their consent have committed suicide as a result.
  • The inferred impact of the distribution of intimate images on victims accordingly is substantial, and the moral responsibility of such offenders generally will be high.
  • Moreover, our courts recognize that via the internet the images can be forever available.

The plaintiffs stated in their affidavit evidence that they have suffered psychological harm as a result of the violation they have experienced. The Judge was content that s. 2 of the Canadian Criminal Code was a full answer that psychological harm is covered under s. 178(1)(a.1)(i) of the BIA. Section 2 of the Criminal Code explains “bodily harm” as “any hurt or injury to a person that interferes with the health or comfort of the person and that is more than merely transient or trifling in nature.” Therefore the Judge determined that it encompasses the emotional trauma and hurt the plaintiffs detailed in their affidavits.

The Judge found that the psychological harm suffered by the plaintiffs constituted “bodily harm” for the purposes of s.178(1)(a.1)(i), and that this harm was “intentionally inflicted” in the sense that the images were distributed with “specific intent to injure.” The Judge ruled that the plaintiffs’ case against Mr. Schwabe is a debt action, not one that he can be discharged from. If the plaintiffs are successful, they will be awarded damages for the intentional bodily harm inflicted.

Similarly, a successful civil lawsuit judgment for a debt arising from action under defamation laws resulting from intentional bodily harm inflicted would also survive the defendant’s bankruptcy.

defamation to character
defamation to character

Can I bring a claim for emotional distress?

This is a decision out of the Milton, Ontario small claims court. Obviously, the amount of money involved fits under the small claims court jurisdiction, but it resulted in a thoughtful 31-page decision from the Court. This is a cyberbullying case between two people who once lived in a common-law relationship.

This case included cyber libel claims. The wrongness lies in making her private, intimate personal life globally public by way of online video. This case too involves bodily injury intentionally inflicted and more specifically, the plaintiff’s mental health as a direct result of the defendant’s actions.

The Court determined that when it comes to the tort of intentional infliction of nervous shock, the law does not recognize any mental states that fall short of a provable injury. The requirements for this tort are:

  • The defendant’s conduct must have been extreme and outrageous.
  • The defendant must have intentionally or recklessly caused the plaintiff emotional distress.
  • The plaintiff must have suffered a visible and provable injury as a result of the defendant’s conduct.

Although small claims court in the Greater Toronto Area is limited to claims not exceeding $35,000, including the award, in this case, it is the care that the small claims court Deputy Judge took that impresses me. This case was only about actual damages and not punitive damages, hence the relatively The Deputy Judge stated that this court emphasizes that it is making an award of damages for bodily harm intentionally inflicted, in the event that any recourse is sought in future to the BIA and, more particularly, s. 178(1)(a.1)(i)).

This case, and the others, show that if the evidence is such that the damages were caused by intentional behaviour to inflict bodily damage, which includes a mental state that can be shown to be a provable injury based on the intentional conduct of the defendant, then that claim will not be discharged when the bankrupt obtains his or her discharge from bankruptcy.

What are the possible punishments for defamation to character?

As you can see, there could be both criminal and civil consequences for defamation to character. In the Johnny Depp – Amber Heard case, if it was Canadian and Amber Head filed for bankruptcy in order to avoid paying the judgment to Johnny Depp, assuming she had the ability to pay, that debt may very well survive her bankruptcy discharge. As outlined above, in order to survive, Johnny Depp would have to show that he has experienced bodily injury, which could include a real mental health disorder, as a result of the intentional acts of Amber Heard.

If so, like in 2 of the 3 above cases, Johnny Depp’s claim against Amber Heard for that defamatory matter would survive under section 178(1)(a.1)(i)) of the BIA.

defamation to character
defamation to character

What happens to a civil award for defamation to character in bankruptcy?

I hope this Brandon’s Blog on what would happen if the Johnny Depp – Amber Heard case and civil lawsuit judgment award was a Canadian case and then Amber Heard filed for bankruptcy to avoid paying the judgment for defamation to character. I hope it was helpful to you in understanding more about this type of debt arising from a defamatory statement which would survive the bankruptcy of a defendant like Amber Heard.

If you or your company has too heavy a debt load, we understand how you feel. You’re stressed out and anxious because you can’t fix your or your company’s financial situation on your own. But don’t worry. As a government-licensed insolvency professional firm, we can help you get your personal or corporate finances back on track.

If you’re struggling with money problems, call the Ira Smith Team today. We’ll work with you to develop a personalized plan to get you back on track and stress-free, all while avoiding the bankruptcy process if at all possible.

Call us today and get back on the path to a healthy stress-free life.

defamation to character
defamation to character
Call a Trustee Now!