You are on page 1of 36

Court File No.

/N° du dossier du greffe: CV-18-00000629-0000

ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
Electronically issued
: 23-Apr-2018
Délivré par voie électronique
Barrie
B E T W E E N:

PATRICK BROWN
Plaintiff

- and –

CTV, a division of BELL MEDIA INC., BELL MEDIA INC., WENDY FREEMAN,
LISA LAFLAMME, GLEN McGREGOR, RACHEL AIELLO, JANE OR JOHN DOE
#1 (being the producers of the Defamatory Words), JANE OR JOHN DOE #2
(being the editors of the Defamatory Words), JANE OR JOHN DOE #3 (being the
researchers in respect of the Defamatory Words), JANE OR JOHN DOE #4
(being the fact checkers in respect of the Defamatory Words), CP24, a division of
BELL MEDIA INC., and TRAVIS DHANRAJ

Defendants

STATEMENT OF CLAIM

TO THE DEFENDANTS

A LEGAL PROCEEDING HAS BEEN COMMENCED AGAINST YOU by the plaintiff.
The claim made against you is set out in the following pages.

IF YOU WISH TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING, you or an Ontario lawyer acting for
you must prepare a statement of defence in Form 18A prescribed by the Rules of Civil
Procedure, serve it on the plaintiff’s lawyer or, where the plaintiff does not have a lawyer,
serve it on the plaintiff, and file it, with proof of service in this court office, WITHIN
TWENTY DAYS after this statement of claim is served on you, if you are served in
Ontario.

If you are served in another province or territory of Canada or in the United States of
America, the period for serving and filing your statement of defence is forty days. If you
are served outside Canada and the United States of America, the period is sixty days.
2

Instead of serving and filing a statement of defence, you may serve and file a notice of
intent to defend in Form 18B prescribed by the Rules of Civil Procedure. This will entitle
you to ten more days within which to serve and file your statement of defence.

IF YOU FAIL TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING, JUDGMENT MAY BE GIVEN
AGAINST YOU IN YOUR ABSENCE AND WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE TO YOU. IF
YOU WISH TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING BUT ARE UNABLE TO PAY LEGAL
FEES, LEGAL AID MAY BE AVAILABLE TO YOU BY CONTACTING A LOCAL LEGAL
AID OFFICE.

TAKE NOTICE: THIS ACTION WILL AUTOMATICALLY BE DISMISSED if it has not
been set down for trial or terminated by any means within five years after the action was
commenced unless otherwise ordered by the court.

Date: April 23, 2018 Issued by_______________________
Local registrar

Address of court office:
Ontario Superior Court of Justice
75 Mulcaster Street
Barrie, ON L4M 3P2

TO: CTV, a division of Bell Media Inc.
299 Queen St. W
Toronto, ON M5V 2Z5

AND TO: BELL MEDIA INC.
299 Queen St. W
Toronto, ON M5V 2Z5

AND TO: WENDY FREEMAN
299 Queen St. W
Toronto, ON M5V 2Z5

AND TO: LISA LAFLAMME
299 Queen St. W
Toronto, ON M5V 2Z5

AND TO: GLEN MCGREGOR
299 Queen St. W
Toronto, ON M5V 2Z5
3

AND TO: RACHEL AIELLO
299 Queen St. W
Toronto, ON M5V 2Z5

AND TO: JANE or JOHN DOE #1 (being the producers
of the Defamatory Words)
299 Queen St. W
Toronto, ON M5V 2Z5

AND TO: JANE OR JOHN DOE #2 (being the editors of
the Defamatory Words)
299 Queen St. W
Toronto, ON M5V 2Z5

AND TO: JANE OR JOHN DOE #3 (being the
researchers in respect of the Defamatory
Words)
299 Queen St. W
Toronto, ON M5V 2Z5

AND TO: JANE OR JOHN DOE #4 (being the fact
checkers in respect of the Defamatory
Words)
299 Queen St. W
Toronto, ON M5V 2Z5

AND TO: CP24, a division of Bell Media Inc.
299 Queen St. W
Toronto, ON M5V 2Z5

AND TO: TRAVIS DHANRAJ
299 Queen St. W
Toronto, ON M5V 2Z5
4

CLAIM

1. The plaintiff, Patrick Brown (“Mr. Brown”) claims as against each defendant, jointly

and severally:

a) General damages for defamation in the amount of $4,000,000;

b) Special damages in an amount to be determined at trial;

c) Punitive, aggravated and exemplary damages in the total amount of $4,000,000;

d) An interlocutory injunction, requiring the defendants to remove from all media in

their possession and control all broadcasts and publications that allege, in their

natural and ordinary meaning or by innuendo, that Mr. Brown illegally provided an

underage high school girl with alcohol, or words of like or similar effect;

e) A permanent injunction,

i) Requiring the defendants to remove from all media in their possession and

control the Defamatory Words, defined herein, or words of like or similar effect;

and

ii) Prohibiting the defendants from speaking, publishing, broadcasting or in any

way disseminating, in any manner whatsoever, the Defamatory Words, and the

innuendo arising from them, or words of like or similar effect;

f) Costs of the action on a substantial indemnity basis, inclusive of HST;
5

g) Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest in accordance with the Courts of Justice

Act, RSO 1990, c. C.43; and

h) Such further and other relief as counsel may advise and this Honourable Court

may permit.

The Plaintiff

2. Mr. Brown resides in the township of Oro Medonte. From the time that he was a

teenager volunteering with the local PC Riding Association and becoming National

President of the PC Youth Federation, to being elected to City Council in Barrie at the

age of 22, to being elected as a Member of Parliament (“MP”) for Barrie in 2006, to

being re-elected as an MP in 2008 and in 2011 (by over 21,000 votes), to winning the

Leadership of the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario (“ON PC Party”) in 2015

and soon after being elected as a Member of Provincial Parliament (“MPP”) for the

riding of Simcoe North, Mr. Brown has dedicated his life to politics and public service.

3. Prior to the broadcast and publication of the Defamatory Words, polls indicated that

under Mr. Brown’s leadership, the ON PC Party was set to overtake the Wynne

Liberals. Members of the ON PC Party, under Mr. Brown’s leadership, were winning

by-elections in expected seats by large margins and winning seats that had never

been held or had not been held for many years by the ON PC Party. According to the

defendant CTV, Mr. Brown was “an ascending star in the Canadian political universe”

who “now threatens to topple Liberal Leader Kathleen Wynne and become Ontario’s

next premier in the June provincial election.” Mr. Brown was the presumptive next

Premier of Ontario.
6

4. Mr. Brown’s “People’s Guarantee” platform was well received by many, even praised

by the Toronto Star, a newspaper that has a history of endorsing left-leaning political

candidates and their parties during provincial and federal elections. Mr. Brown

fundraided millions of dollars and modernized the ON PC Party by expanding the

appeal of the ON PC Party to cultural communities, marching in Toronto’s Pride

Parade, taking steps to combat Islamophobia, and addressing climate change.

5. The widespread and sensationalized broadcast and publication of the Defamatory

Words delivered an almost immediate death blow to Mr. Brown’s reputation and

political career: Within hours, Mr. Brown was forced to resign as Leader of the ON PC

Party, his rising political aspirations shattered.

6. Having been ejected from the Tory caucus, Mr. Brown currently sits as an Independent

MPP for the riding of Simcoe North.

7. With a provincial election only months away, the defendants’ false, malicious, unfair

and irresponsible reporting has subverted the democratic process in Ontario and has

altered, for the foreseeable future, the political landscape and governance of Ontario.

The Defendants

8. The defendant Bell Media Inc. (“Bell Media”) owns CTV and approximately 30 local

television stations. It is Canada’s largest radio broadcaster; operates more than 200

websites; and provides live and on-demand content to, among others, CTV News and

CP24.
7

9. Bell Media is owned by BCE Inc., Canada’s largest communications company. Bell

Media broadly disseminated the Defamatory Words through its television and radio

broadcast stations and through its online content, including on CTV News and CP24

and other broadcasting stations and/or websites currently unknown to Mr. Brown.

10. The defendant CTV, a division of Bell Media, is Canada’s #1 television network and

largest private broadcaster. CTV has a number of divisions, including CTV News,

which Bell Media claims is Canada’s most watched news organization both locally and

nationally, and operates the websites www.ctv.ca and www.ctvnews.ca, among others

(collectively referred to as “CTV”).

11. According to CTV, CTV National News with Lisa LaFlamme is Canada’s most watched

national newscast and has an average audience of 1.1 million viewers on any given

weekday. CTV first broadcast the Defamatory Words on the January 24, 2018 edition

of this newscast and continues to broadcast the Defamatory Words to the date of this

Claim on www.ctvnews.ca, CTV News’ Facebook page, CTV News’ and CTV National

News’ Twitter pages, and other Bell Media websites unknown to Mr. Brown.

12. The defendant Wendy Freeman (“Freeman”) is president of CTV News and has

ultimate responsibility for what is broadcast and published by CTV News.

13. The defendant Lisa LaFlamme (“LaFlamme”) is the Chief News Anchor and Senior

Editor of CTV National News with Lisa LaFlamme. LaFlamme played a key role in

the broadcast and publication of the Defamatory Words. LaFlamme did, or may have,

in whole or in part, initiate, investigate, fact-check, edit, produce, and/or co-author the

Defamatory Words. Further, LaFlamme did, or may have, in whole or in part, conduct
8

on-tape and other interviews of, among others, Accuser 1, defined herein, and

Accuser 2, defined herein. Notwithstanding this, the January 24 Broadcast, defined

herein, was edited in a manner that conceals LaFlamme’s role in any on-tape or other

interviews with Accuser 1 and Accuser 2 in an attempt to, among things, lead viewers

to believe that LaFlamme was more independent in relation to her reporting on Mr.

Brown than in fact she was.

14. Glen McGregor (“McGregor”) is the Senior Political Correspondent of CTV National

News. McGregor played a key role in the broadcast and publication of the Defamatory

Words. McGregor did, or may have, in whole or in part, also initiate, investigate, fact-

check, edit, produce, and/or co-author the Defamatory Words. Further, McGregor did,

or may have, in whole or in part, conduct on-tape and other interviews of, among

others, Accuser 1 and Accuser 2. The January 24 Broadcast was edited in a manner

that suggests that only McGregor conducted on-tape interviews of Accuser 1 and

Accuser 2.

15. Rachel Aiello (“Aiello”) is the Online Politics Producer of CTV News. Aiello played a

key role in the broadcast and publication of the Defamatory Words. Aiello did or may

have, in whole or in part, also initiate, investigate, fact-check, edit, produce, and/or co-

author the Defamatory Words. Further, Aiello did or may have, in whole or in part,

conduct on-tape and other interviews of, among others, Accuser 1 and Accuser 2.

Aiello was specifically acknowledged by LaFlamme as having done “an enormous

amount of reporting on the story.”
9

16. The defendant, CP24, a division of the defendant Bell Media, is a CTV News operation

providing a 24-hour local news channel based in Toronto. It focuses on news from

the greater Toronto area and southern Ontario as well as national and international

news. CP24 employs the defendant Travis Dhanraj (“Dhanraj”) and broadcast and

published the Defamatory Words on www.cp24.com, CP24’s Facebook page and

CP24’s Twitter feed, among other places.

17. Dhanraj is a reporter for CTV News Toronto. Dhanraj played a key role in the

broadcast and publication of the Defamatory Words. Dhanraj did or may have, in

whole or in part, also initiate, investigate, fact-check, edit, produce, and/or co-author

the Defamatory Words. Further, Dhanraj did or may have, in whole or in part, conduct

on-tape and other interviews of, among others, Accuser 1 and Accuser 2.

18. The defendant Jane or John Doe #1 played a key role in the broadcast and publication

of the Defamatory Words. He or she did, in whole or in part, produce the Defamatory

Words.

19. The defendant Jane or John Doe #2 played a key role in the broadcast and publication

of the Defamatory Words. He or she did, in whole or in part, edit the Defamatory

Words.

20. The defendant Jane or John Doe #3 played a key role in the broadcast and publication

of the Defamatory Words. He or she did, in whole or in part, research the Defamatory

Words.
10

21. The defendant Jane or John Doe #4 played a key role in the broadcast and publication

of the Defamatory Words. He or she did or may have, in whole or in part, fact-check

the Defamatory Words.

22. The defendants, alone and together, falsely, maliciously, unfairly and irresponsibly

broadcast and published the Defamatory Words.

23. The defendants, alone and together, intended and knew or ought to have known, that

the Defamatory Words would be broadly disseminated across Ontario and Canada

and throughout the world and would be repeated by other media organizations; which

they were.

The Broadcasts and Publications

24. The defendants, jointly and severally, falsely, maliciously, unfairly and irresponsibly

broadcast and/or published the following newscasts, news articles, Tweets and

Facebook posts of and concerning Mr. Brown in Ontario and Canada and worldwide

on the Internet:

The January 24, 2018 Broadcast and Publications

a) Tweet on CTV News Twitter account on January 24, 2018, beginning with the text:

“EXCLUSIVE: Two women come forward with sexual misconduct allegations

against Ontario Progressive Conservative Leader Patrick Brown…”;
11

b) Tweet on CTV National News Twitter account on January 24, 2018, beginning with

the text: “EXCLUSIVE: Two women come forward with graphic sexual misconduct

allegations against Ontario Progressive Conservative Leader Patrick Brown…”;

c) Re-Tweet on LaFlamme Twitter account on January 24, 2018, beginning with the

text: “EXCLUSIVE: Two women come forward with graphic sexual misconduct

allegations against Ontario Progressive Conservative Leader Patrick Brown…”;

d) CP24 Facebook post on January 24, 2018, beginning with the text: “#BREAKING

CTV News has learned that two women have come forward with graphic sexual

misconduct allegations against Brown” (subparagraphs a) to d) collectively

referred to as the “January 24 Social Media Posts”);

e) Newscast on CTV National News with Lisa LaFlamme on January 24, 2018 live at

10pm on CTV News Channel, CTV News GO and ctvnews.ca with hourly repeats

until 2am the next day headlined as, among other things, “CTV News Exclusive,

Disturbing allegations of sexual misconduct against the man who wants to be the

next Premier of Ontario,” and further headlined on www.ctvnews.ca as “Serious

allegations against Patrick Brown” and “Women accuse Patrick Brown of sexual

misconduct” (the “January 24 Broadcast”);

f) News article published on January 24, 2018 at 10pm on www.ctvnews.ca entitled

“Patrick Brown denies sexual misconduct allegations from two women” (the

“January 24 Article”);
12

The January 25, 2018 Publications

g) News article published on January 25, 2018 at 12:29pm on www.ctv.ca entitled

“Patrick Brown denies sexual misconduct allegations from two women, resigns as

Ontario PC Leader” (the “January 24 Article (Updated January 25)”);

h) Tweet on Dhanraj Twitter account published on January 25, 2018, beginning with

the text: “BREAKING: @brownbarrie PC Leader Patrick Brown has resigned amid

sexual misconduct allegations first reported by @CTVNews and @CP24” (the

“January 25 Dhanraj Tweet”);

i) Tweet on CTV National News Twitter account on January 25, 2018, beginning with

the text: “EXCLUSIVE TONIGHT: Two more women in Patrick Brown’s home

riding of Barrie go on the record…” (the “January 25 CTV Tweet”);

The February 13, 2018 Publications

j) News article published on February 13, 2018 at 11pm on www.ctv.ca entitled

“Patrick Brown accusers stand by allegations” (the “February 13 Article”);

k) Tweet from CTV News Twitter account on February 13, 2018, reading: “Patrick

Brown accusers stand by allegations” (the “February 13 Tweet”);

The February 22, 2018 Publication

l) News article published on, February 22, 2018 at 6:59pm on www.ctv.ca entitled

“Patrick Brown denies sexual misconduct allegations from two women, resigns as

Ontario PC Leader” (the “January 24 Article (Updated February 22)”); and
13

Newscasts, articles, and social media posts broadcast and/or published on such

further dates and on such further times as Mr. Brown is currently unaware (collectively,

the “Defamatory Words”).

25. The Defamatory Words were and continue to be broadcast and/or published online at

www.ctvnews.ca, and www.cp24.com, on the defendants’ social media accounts, and

on such further and other websites and social media accounts as Mr. Brown is

currently unaware.

26. The Defamatory Words in their natural and ordinary meaning and/or by inference or

innuendo are false, malicious and defamatory of Mr. Brown, were broadcast and

published maliciously, unfairly and irresponsibly, have subjected and will subject Mr.

Brown to ridicule, hatred and contempt and have caused and will continue to cause

damage to his reputation personally and in the way of his office, profession, trade and

calling.

27. Mr. Brown intends to rely on the entirety of the Defamatory Words, including all

accompanying headlines, display, graphics, audio, pictures, and text and the manner

of initiating the investigation, investigating, fact-checking, editing, producing and

writing the Defamatory Words in support of his Claim. He further intends to rely on all

earlier and subsequent versions of the Defamatory Words published or republished,

in any form whatsoever, in whole or in part, by the defendants and others.

28. In particular, Mr. Brown complains of the words set out below in respect of each

respective broadcast and/or publication referred to in paragraph 24 above.
14

The Words Complained of

29. In particular, in relation to the January 24 Social Media Posts, the January 24

Broadcast, the January 24 Article, the January 25 Dhanraj Tweet, the January 24

Article (Updated January 25), and the January 24 Article (Updated February 22), Mr.

Brown complains of the following words:

The January 24 Social Media Posts

EXCLUSIVE: Two women come forward with graphic sexual misconduct allegations
against Ontario Progressive Conservative Leader Patrick Brown. Allegations, which
Brown denies, date back to when he was a federal MP. Watch @glen_mcgregor’s report
tonight. #cdnpoli #onpoli

EXCLUSIVE: Two women come forward with sexual misconduct allegations against
Ontario Progressive Conservative Leader Patrick Brown which he denies

#BREAKING: CTV News has learned that two women have come forward with graphic
sexual misconduct allegations against Brown

The January 24 Broadcast

A CTV News exclusive – disturbing allegations of sexual misconduct against the man who
wants to be the next Premier of Ontario

Patrick Brown’s accusers (hereinafter in the Claim referred to as “Accuser 1” and “Accuser
2” respectively

He said suck my [censored bleep] or put this in your mouth

He continued to kiss me and he laid me down on the bed and got on top of me

Uncomfortable allegations… an international show of hands calling out alleged sexual
predators. Men - said to be abusing positions of power against an avalanche of women
and girls.

…in an exclusive report, two women have come forward, accusing the leader of Ontario’s
Progressive Conservative Party, Patrick Brown, of sexual misconduct. Brown, a former
federal MP, is currently campaigning for the job of Ontario Premier

The women were both teenagers at the time of the alleged abuse. Neither wanted their
faces on camera.

Glen McGregor, has the details, and a warning that some of the language is very graphic.
15

Patrick Brown is a young conservative and an ascending star in the Canadian political
universe. But, tonight there are disturbing allegations against Brown by two women who
spoke to CTV News.

One, still in high school when she says Brown asked her for a sex act.

He pulled down his pants and said – I don't know if he said suck my dick or
put this in your mouth or something along those lines.

The high school student met him in a bar…when she was under Ontario’s legal drinking
age. Brown, who she says wasn’t drinking, invited them both back to his home. She was
drunk.

When we got to his room he kind of shut the door on me and started making
some moves. After about five or ten minutes. So, I kind of came to… I was
frantic, like, you need to let me out, I’m leaving. It was, like, a controlling thing.

Another woman came forward with a similar story about Brown…She was 18 and in first
year university…

And I laughed it off as, you know, an older man kind hitting on me a little bit.

At an after party in a local nightclub, the woman, then legal age, says Brown and others
provided her with a string of free drinks.

It was too many to count.

The woman says she was drunk by the time Brown – who again, wasn’t drinking –invited
her and a male friend of his to his bedroom...the friend left, leaving her and Brown sitting
on the bed.

That scenario, like, of a very inebriated young employee in the bedroom of her boss,
alone with him, uh, who hasn’t had a drop of alcohol all night…that’s an intimidating
situation, and I was ah not sure what to do about it.

The next thing I know, he’s kissing me, and sitting beside me kissing me…then I kind
of just froze up …he continued to kiss me and he laid me down on the bed and got on
top of me…

I remember consciously trying to not move my mouth… I was just not moving… so I
was lying there immobile and he kept kissing me.

I could feel his erection on my legs, uh, when he was on top of me, so, I felt that…it
would have gone to sexual intercourse if I had not done anything.

I would characterize that as a sexual assault.

…he pressed her to join him as an assistant on his India trip, promising all expenses would
be paid, and he also gave her a raise.

Old single politician preying on young girls
16

…five key people resigned including Brown’s Campaign Manager, Chief of Staff, Deputy
Campaign Manager and Press Secretary – All quit.

In a statement they said they learned of the allegations today and had urged Brown to
step down.

The January 24 Article

WARNING: This story contains graphic details

Ontario Progressive Conservative Leader Patrick Brown is facing serious allegations of
sexual misconduct from two women…

The women allege inappropriate behaviour by the rising political figure throughout his
tenure as an elected official

One was still in high school when she says Brown, a well-known Barrie politician, asked
her to perform oral sex on him.

The other, a university student…alleges Brown sexually assaulted her…

Both incidents are alleged to have happened inside Brown’s home…after the women had
been drinking in his presence.

The first incident occurred more than 10 years ago. The woman, a high school student in
Barrie at the time, said she and a mutual friend met Brown at a bar.

Brown then invited them back to his home and provided them with alcohol, though the
woman was under the legal drinking age at the time.

She says she was drunk when Brown invited her for a tour of his home. When the pair
entered the bedroom, Brown closed the door and exposed his penis to her.

“He pulled down his pants said, and I don’t know if he said ‘suck my dick’ or ‘put this in
your mouth,’ but something along those lines,” she said.

The woman alleges that he then asked her to perform oral sex, which she did for a short
time before stopping.

“It was like a controlling thing… like I just remember I wanted to go, but that wasn’t
happening."

“He's an old, single, politician preying on young girls…”

Another woman came forward with a similar story…

She said she met the then-Conservative MP…when she was 18

Brown gave the woman his phone number and the names of Barrie bars that he’d be at
that night…even though she was 18 at the time—below Ontario’s legal drinking age.
17

“I kinda laughed it off as an older man…hitting on me”

At an after-party…the woman says Brown and others provided her with a string of free
alcoholic beverages. She was by then legal age.

“It was too many to count”

The woman says she was extremely drunk when Brown invited her and a male friend of
his to Brown’s bedroom...

Brown's friend then left, leaving her and Brown to sit alone on the bed.

“The next thing I know he's kissing me. Sitting beside me, kissing me and then I was, I
kind of just froze up. He continued to kiss me and he laid me down on the bed and got on
top of me. I remember consciously trying not to move my mouth and I was just not moving,
so I was laying there immobile and he kept kissing me,” she said.

“I felt it was sexual. I could feel his erection on my legs when he was on top of me so I felt
that it would have gone to sexual intercourse if I had not done anything,” she said. “I would
characterize that as a sexual assault.”

“That scenario, like of a very inebriated young employee in the bedroom of her boss, alone
with him, who hasn’t had a drop of alcohol all night, just that’s an intimidating situation and
I was not sure what to do about it”

The January 25 Dhanraj Tweet

BREAKING: @brownbarrie PC Leader Patrick Brown has resigned amid sexual
misconduct allegations first reported by @CTVNews and @CP24

The January 24 Article (Updated January 25)

In relation to the January 24 Article (Updated January 25), Mr. Brown complains of the

words repeated from the January 24 Article particularized above and the additional

following words:

Patrick Brown has resigned as Ontario Progressive Conservative Leader after serious
allegations of sexual misconduct from two women

A separate statement from Ontario PC deputy leaders Sylvia Jones and Steve Clark…said
they unanimously agree Brown couldn’t continue serving as the party’s leader.

“…he cannot lead us into an election as a result of these allegations”
18

After becoming aware of the allegations late Wednesday, a number of Brown’s closest
advisors resigned.

Campaign Manager Andrew Boddington, Chief of Staff Alykhan Velshi, and Deputy
Campaign Manager Dan Robertson released a joint statement saying “earlier today, all
three of us became aware of allegations about Patrick Brown. After speaking with him,
our advice was that he should resign as Ontario PC Party leader. He did not accept that
advice.”

As well, Ontario PC press secretary Nick Bergamini, staffer Ken Bossenkool and deputy
campaign manager Joshua Workman all tweeted their resignations.

Brown, a well-reported teetotaller, was not drinking alcohol at the time of the alleged
incidents

The January 24 Article (Updated February 22)

Mr. Brown complains of the words set out above from the January 24 Article and the

January 24 Article (Updated January 25) which were republished in the January 24 Article

(Updated February 22).

30. Mr. Brown states that, in relation to the January 24 Social Media Posts, the January

24 Broadcast, the January 24 Article, the January 25 Dhanraj Tweet, the January 24

Article (Updated January 25), and the January 24 Article (Updated February 22), the

words complained of, alone and/or cumulatively, in their natural and ordinary meaning,

and by innuendo, meant and were understood to mean one or more of the following:

a) In relation to Accuser 1, by engaging in the conduct described, he illegally provided

an underage high school girl with alcohol and then sexually assaulted her;

b) In relation to Accuser 2, by engaging in the conduct described, he provided a

teenaged female employee with alcohol and then sexually assaulted her;
19

c) As a result of the conduct described in (a) and (b) above, Mr. Brown is a sexual

predator;

d) In respect of the reports of Accuser 1 and Accuser 2, the allegations against him,

as described, are true;

e) the resignations of five key ON PC Party Campaign officials on January 24, 2018

confirm that the allegations are true; and

f) By virtue of paragraphs (a) to (e) above, he is unfit for public office.

The January 25 CTV Tweet

31. In particular, in relation to the January 25 CTV Tweet, Mr. Brown complains of the

following words:

EXCLUSIVE TONIGHT: Two more women in Patrick Brown’s home riding of Barrie go on
the record about his alleged behaviour. Plus reaction from his two accusers on his
resignation as Ontario PC Leader. Watch @glen_mcgregor’s report tonight. #cdnpoli
#onpoli”.

32. Mr. Brown states that, in relation to the January 25 Tweet, the words complained of,

in their natural and ordinary meaning and by innuendo, meant and were understood

to mean that:

a) Two more women reporting that he had sexually assaulted them have come

forward;

b) The reports of the two additional women corroborate the truth that he sexually

assaulted Accuser 1 and Accuser 2;
20

c) As a result of the accounts of the now four women, he is a serial sexual predator;

d) By virtue of paragraphs (a) to (c) above, he is unfit for public office.

The February 13 Publications

33. In particular, in relation to the February 13 Tweet and February 13 Article, Mr. Brown

complains of the following words:

The February 13 Tweet

Patrick Brown accusers stand by allegations.

The February 13 Article

The two women who accused former Progressive Conservative leader Patrick Brown of
sexual misconduct are not backing down despite a concerted effort to refute their
allegations and discredit them publicly…

"I stand absolutely by the truth of what I said to CTV…” said the woman who accused
Brown of dropping his pants and telling her to perform oral sex in his home about 10 years
ago…

“The comments that I have been subjected to ignore altogether the abuse of power by an
older sober man over a young intoxicated woman," she said.

She now says that she was of legal drinking age and out of high school. Brown was a
Conservative member of Parliament at the time of the alleged incident.

The first accuser maintains the incident happened during a visit to Brown's home with a
mutual friend.

That friend told CTV News he has no recollection of the night.

So I kind of came to, frantic, like 'you need to let me out, I'm leaving,'" the first accuser
said.

'He whipped it out....'

In that same home, a second allegation, from a former employee of Brown’s who was 19
and in first-year university. She alleged the then-35-year-old MP got on top of her and tried
to kiss her when she was very drunk.

"I continue to stand by the detailed account of these events that I have previously provided
to CTV," the second accuser said
21

CTV News asked Brown today if he thinks the two women accusing him of sexual
misconduct are lying. He has not responded.

“I stand absolutely by the truth of what I said to CTV.”

“… precise details of how I was victimized…”

“… the abuse of power by an older sober man over a young intoxicated woman in this
case.”

“These are the sorts of collateral details that inevitably fade over time.”

34. Mr. Brown states that, in relation to the February 13 Tweet and the February 13 Article,

the words complained of, in their natural and ordinary meaning and by innuendo,

meant and were understood to mean that:

a) In relation to Accuser 1, by engaging in the conduct described, he provided a

teenaged girl with alcohol and then sexually assaulted her;

b) In relation to Accuser 2, by engaging in the conduct described, he provided a

teenaged female employee with alcohol and then sexually assaulted her;

c) As a result of the conduct described in (a) and (b) above, he is a sexual predator;

d) In respect of the reports of Accuser 1 and Accuser 2, the allegations against him,

as described, are true; and

e) By virtue of paragraphs (a) to (d) above, he is unfit for public office.
22

35. Mr. Brown states that the Defamatory Words, cumulatively, in their natural and

ordinary meaning, and by innuendo, meant and were understood to mean that:

a) In respect of Accuser 1, he illegally provided an underage high school girl with

alcohol and then sexually assaulted her;

b) In respect of Accuser 2, he provided a teenaged female employee with alcohol and

then sexually assaulted her;

c) As a result of subparagraphs (a) to (b) above, Mr. Brown is a sexual predator;

d) In respect of the reports of Accuser 1 and Accuser 2, the allegations against him,

as described, are true;

e) the resignations of five key ON PC Party Campaign officials on January 24, 2018

confirm that the allegations are true; and

f) As a result of paragraphs (a) to (e) above, he is unfit for public office.

36. The defendants published the Defamatory Words, and the innuendo arising from

them, unfairly, irresponsibly and with express malice, intending or knowing that the

Defamatory Words and the innuendo arising from them were false and defamatory or

with reckless disregard as to whether they were true or false and in utter disregard of

the consequences of the broadcasts and publications.

37. Further, the defendants broadcast and published the Defamatory Words intending or

knowing that the Defamatory Words, and the innuendo arising from them, would be
23

rebroadcast and republished, in whole or in part by others, and, accordingly, the

defendants are jointly and severally liable for all such rebroadcast and republication.

The Defendants’ Further Republications of the Defamatory Words

38. In aggravation of the damages caused, the defendants have persisted in repeating

and asserting the truth of the Defamatory Words and the innuendo arising from them

in Bell Media broadcasts and publications, all of which remain available on

www.ctvnews.ca, www.cp24.com, and other websites and/or mobile device

applications owned and operated by Bell Media to the date of this Claim.

39. In two further broadcasts on January 25, 2018 and February 13, 2018, the defendants,

in addition to repeating and re-asserting the truth of the Defamatory Words and the

innuendo arising from them, broadcast the following words:

January 25, 2018 CTV National News with Lisa LaFlamme Broadcast

After shock from the fall of Patrick Brown

If you say no, he tried again

[Kathleen Wynne]: That is up to him to deal with his own conscience.

Early this morning it was PC leader in Ontario, Patrick Brown, a move that followed damning
details on this broadcast of alleged sexual misconduct with teenaged girls.

[Prime Minister Trudeau]: My thoughts turn immediately to the women who came forward,
knowing how difficult it is, it can be … uh … to salute them for their courage and their
leadership.

Patrick Brown publicly denied those allegations last night. And shortly after that statement,
almost every top member of Brown’s staff stepped down.

The party he led said it could no longer follow him after hearing accusations from those two
women about incidents that took place – again - when they were teenagers.

The allegations pile up in front of Patrick Brown’s office, the Ontario legislature…
24

Brown resigned less than 4 hours later, after a conference call with fellow PC MPPs, who all
agreed he had to leave because of sexual misconduct allegations from two young women,
raised in an exclusive CTV News report - allegations he denies.

In the city Brown represents, the claims were not a complete shock.

…someone that was running for MP would be partying with, like, basically underage girls.

I was still in high school. No, I’m not going with this. So, I was like I really want to go. I want
out of this room. I want to go home.

When I was lying there motionless, my mind was reeling with all of the ways that um if I
rejected him, all of the ways that he could ruin my reputation or hold this over me in some
way.

Today, an offer of support from Ontario’s Premier.

[Kathleen Wynne]: I would say to those young women that they were very brave and I want
to, I acknowledge that, um, that it was very courageous for them to step forward.

So, we didn’t show their faces but they are not anonymous to us, after extensive fact-checking.

February 13, 2018 CTV National News with Lisa LaFlamme Broadcast (the “February 13
Broadcast”)

CTV News has learned the online abuse has only intensified since Brown put together another
team including private eyes and PR experts to find dirt on his accusers.

[McGregor quoting Brown] “It was she who tried to kiss me, while the woman I was seeing
was in another room”, Brown said. “I stopped immediately and offered to drive her home,
which I did.”

40. McGregor intentionally misquoted Mr. Brown in the February 13, 2018 Broadcast,

omitting the word “her” when quoting Mr. Brown’s Facebook statement, which reads:

“I stopped her immediately.”

41. The defendants knew or ought to have known that the flood of stories from competing

media and others, many of which remain available online and which repeat the

allegations of illegal and criminal conduct was a predictable result of the defendants
25

putting forth a sensational news report about the person expected to become Ontario’s

next Premier.

42. The defendants further knew or ought to have known that their broadcast and

publication of the Defamatory Words on the Internet facilitated and encouraged the

republication of the Defamatory Words to the widest possible audience.

The Devastating Impact of the Defamatory Words

43. As a result of the broadcast and publication of the Defamatory Words, and all

repetitions, republication and broadcast of them, and the malicious, unfair and

irresponsible conduct of the defendants, Mr. Brown has been injured in his feelings,

in his personal and professional character and reputation, and in his office, profession,

trade or calling.

44. Mr. Brown also did and continues to suffer from stress, anxiety, hurt, humiliation and

embarrassment, and was and is emotionally devastated.

45. The swift demolition of his personal and professional reputation on national television

left Mr. Brown in a complete state of shock and disbelief. Mr. Brown did not want to

leave his home. He felt his world was crashing in on him.

46. Shunned in the political community, Mr. Brown was abandoned by his Campaign

team, forced to resign as Leader of the ON PC Party, ejected from the Tory caucus,

and cast aside from his political party.
26

47. As a result of the foregoing, Mr. Brown has suffered and will continue to suffer

damages for which the defendants are jointly and severally liable.

CTV’s Interference with the Democratic Process

48. Until the defendants destroyed his personal and professional reputation and

demolished his political career, Mr. Brown was expected to become the next Premier

of Ontario.

49. The defendants intentionally broadcast and published sensational newscasts, news

articles, Tweets and Facebook Posts just over 4 months in advance of the Ontario

Provincial election, knowing or having ought to have known or expecting that it would

bring about Mr. Brown’s resignation in disgrace and change the course of the political

landscape in Ontario. As such, the defendants knew or ought to have known that the

Defamatory Words would subvert the democratic process in Ontario.

The Reporting was Malicious, Unfair and Irresponsible

50. The devastating impact of the Defamatory Words, and the innuendo arising from them

was heightened by the way in which the defendants edited the January 24 Broadcast

and subsequent broadcasts: The defendants showed Accuser 1’s and Accuser 2’s

faces in shadow, warned viewers of graphic content, and in respect of Accuser 2, cut

to McGregor as interviewer, nodding and with a serious expression on his face, all of

which cast Mr. Brown in the worst possible light to viewers.

51. CTV News, as Canada’s most watched news organization, had an enormous capacity

to inflict reputational damage on Mr. Brown.
27

52. Given the seriousness of the allegations against Mr. Brown, including allegations of

illegal and criminal conduct, the defendants had an obligation and a duty, which they

failed to fulfill, to thoroughly research, investigate and scrutinize the accounts of

Accuser 1 and Accuser 2, in order to verify the truth, and ensure balance and fairness

in their reporting.

53. The defendants further had an obligation and a duty, which they failed to fulfill, to

report information in their knowledge, or which they could reasonably ascertain, which

was inconsistent with the accounts of Accuser 1 and Accuser 2, and to provide Mr.

Brown with a reasonable opportunity to respond.

Mr. Brown Had No Reasonable Time to Respond

54. While the defendants produced and prepared the January 24 Broadcast and January

24 Article, likely weeks or months in advance, the defendants ambushed Mr. Brown

by email mere hours before the scheduled January 24 Broadcast, requesting a last-

minute on-camera interview (the “Ambush Email”). The defendants placed Mr. Brown

in a position of obvious unfairness, guaranteeing that he only had time to issue a

blanket denial of the false and defamatory allegations.

55. In fact, by way of example, Mr. Brown, with the benefit of a reasonable period of time

to respond, would have been able to advise the defendants that the day after the

alleged event Accuser 2 was smiling and giggly as she told a co-worker friend that

she had kissed Mr. Brown and that she was adamant that nothing else happened.
28

56. By failing to inform CTV National News’ approximately 1.1 million viewers of the unfair

last-minute notice given to Mr. Brown and by referencing Mr. Brown’s blanket denial

in the January 24 Broadcast, the defendants created the impression that the

Defamatory Words and the innuendo arising from them are true and that Mr. Brown

was, in fact, given a reasonable opportunity to respond, but was unwilling or unable

to.

57. Further, in the Ambush Email, McGregor misled Mr. Brown, claiming that the first

incident involved an underage high school girl who was then attending Innisdale

Secondary School in Barrie. The defendants now admit that this was untrue.

McGregor further failed to provide Mr. Brown with Accuser 1’s name or the day, month

and year in which the alleged incident occurred. The false and vague statements

contained in the Ambush Email guaranteed that Mr. Brown would be unable to

meaningfully investigate and respond to it.

58. The defendants maliciously, unfairly and irresponsibly proceeded with the January 24

Broadcast and the January 24 Article, intending to deny Mr. Brown a reasonable

opportunity to respond, and knowing they had failed to provide Mr. Brown with a

reasonable opportunity to respond.

Notice Timeline January 24, 2018

59. It is clear from the below timeline, that CTV had determined to run the January 24

Broadcast regardless of any response from Mr. Brown and the attempt to obtain a

response from Mr. Brown was transparent lip service only to the obligation of

responsibility and good faith.
29

60. At about 4:24pm, McGregor sent the Ambush Email to Mr. Brown’s Communications

Advisor with a note addressed to Alykhan Velshi (“Velshi”), Mr. Brown’s then Chief of

Staff. The Ambush Email stated, among other things:

“I am a reporter with CTV National News in Ottawa. We are looking into allegations

against you of sexual misconduct, made by two women. We would like to arrange

an on-camera interview with you to address these allegations in more detail”

61. At about 4:58 pm, Velshi advised McGregor by email that he had not yet reached Mr.

Brown and requested to know when CTV planned to “run the story”.

62. At about 4:59pm, McGregor responded “We are planning to run a story tonight,

beginning with our 10pm National News broadcast.”

63. At about 8:14pm, counsel to Mr. Brown advised McGregor by email that, among other

things, Mr. Brown denied the false and defamatory allegations and putting McGregor

on notice that that the last-minute request for an on-camera interview hours before

broadcast was an attempt at ambush.

64. Sometime before its 10pm broadcast, CTV National News published a sensational

“teaser” tweet: “EXCLUSIVE: Two women come forward with graphic sexual

misconduct allegations against Ontario Progressive Conservative Leader Patrick

Brown…Watch @glen_mcgregor’s report tonight.”

65. At about 9:45pm, Mr. Brown, after being ambushed by the defendants and aware that

CTV National News intended to broadcast their story at 10pm, speaks at a news

conference, denying the defamatory allegations set out in the Ambush Email.
30

66. At about 9:55pm, Velshi, Chief of Staff, Andrew Boddington, Campaign Manager, and

Dan Robertson, Deputy Campaign Manager resigned via Twitter after becoming

aware of CTV’s allegations against Mr. Brown.

67. At 10pm, CTV commenced the January 24 Broadcast and published the January 24

Article.

68. Soon after or during the January 24 Broadcast, Nick Bergamini, ON PC Party Press

Secretary and Joshua Workman, Deputy Campaign Manager, resigned via Twitter

after learning of CTV’s allegations.

69. At about 1:30am on January 25, 2018, only hours after the broadcast and publication

of the Defamatory Words, members of Mr. Brown’s staff published a resignation

statement from Mr. Brown on the ON PC Party website.

Failure to Fact Check / Omission of Relevant Facts

70. In their publication of the Defamatory Words, the defendants gave the appearance of

delivering a fully researched exposé of a pattern of abusive and predatory conduct by

Mr. Brown. In fact, the defendants crafted a distorted and false narrative, omitting

facts counter to the narrative and failing to verify the accuracy of others that would

alter the narrative. In particular, the defendants, among other things:

a) Prior to the January 24, 2018 broadcast and publication of the Defamatory Words,

failed to fact check whether Accuser 1 was an underage girl attending high school

at the time of the reported incident. On February 13, 2018 at 11pm, after Mr.
31

Brown’s reputation was demolished, the defendants admitted that Accuser 1 was

not underage and not in high school at the relevant time.

b) Prior to the January 24, 2018 broadcast and publication of the Defamatory Words,

failed to contact and seek corroboration of Accuser 1’s account from the “mutual

friend” who the defendants reported drove Accuser 1 to Mr. Brown’s house.

Rather:

i) McGregor only contacted the mutual friend on February 13, 2018, some twenty

days after the January 24 Broadcast and January 24 Article;

ii) On February 13, 2018, the mutual friend indicated to McGregor that he never

drove Accuser 1 to Mr. Brown’s house;

iii) The defendants later published the February 13 Article, intentionally misstating

the mutual friend’s account and/or failing to include the full account provided by

him, all of which maliciously, unfairly and irresponsibly perpetuated the false

narrative crafted by the defendants;

iv) Further, after McGregor asked the mutual friend whether he knew Jordana

Springgay, the mutual friend told McGregor that Accuser 1 and Ms. Springgay,

who works at CTV News Vancouver, were friends in high school. The

defendants knew, or in the alternative, had failed to determine and report this

connection between Accuser 1 and CTV.

c) The defendants failed to include accounts from witnesses who denied and/or did

not corroborate Accuser 2’s account of the alleged incident or who would have
32

knowledge of the night in question. In particular, the defendants, among other

things:

i) Failed to include the account of the unnamed “male friend” who was reported

to have accompanied Accuser 2 to Mr. Brown’s bedroom. In fact, when

McGregor contacted him two days prior to the January 24 Broadcast and the

January 24 Article, the male friend made it clear to McGregor that it was not

true that he had accompanied Accuser 2 to Mr. Brown’s bedroom as was to be

reported.

ii) Failed to include witness accounts that did not corroborate the narrative that

Mr. Brown “provided her with a string of free alcoholic beverages”;

iii) Failed to report the account of a former female staff member of Mr. Brown’s

who provided information to McGregor that did not support the defendants’

false narrative.

d) Failed to report in the January 24 Broadcast and January 24 Article, among others,

that Accuser 2 appeared to have remained an open supporter of Mr. Brown in the

years following the alleged incident.

e) By intentionally misquoting Mr. Brown during the February 13, 2018 Broadcast,

unfairly cast Mr. Brown in the worst possible light to further the defendants’ false

narrative.
33

No Urgency to Broadcast and Publish

71. The defendants’ desire for a “BREAKING” and “EXCLUSIVE” scoop does not excuse

their malicious, unfair and irresponsible reporting of the Defamatory Words. There

was no urgency in broadcasting and publishing the Defamatory Words on January 24,

2018 that would justify failing to fully investigate and verify the facts as reported. The

defendants knew or ought to have known that their investigation fell short of the

standards expected from Canada’s #1 television network and knew or ought to have

known that to proceed with the January 24, 2018 broadcast and publication of the

Defamatory Words was unfair and irresponsible.

The Undisclosed Relationships

72. In their broadcasts and publications of the Defamatory Words, the defendants failed

to disclose the personal relationships between various CTV News personnel and

Accuser 1 and Accuser 2, including the fact that:

a) Aiello and Accuser 2 were co-workers at The Hill Times, a politics and government

newsweekly based in Ottawa; co-authored one or more Hill Times articles; and

appeared in one or more pictures together at Hill Times events beside each other

and smiling; and

b) A CTV News Vancouver producer and Accuser 1 are friends from high school.

73. The existence of the relationships and the defendants’ failure to disclose them,

demonstrate the malice and lack of fairness and independence related to their

reporting.
34

74. Disclosure of the relationships would have significantly altered the way in which the

Defamatory Words were perceived by the public and other media reporting on them.

No Correction, Retraction or Apology

75. In an effort to mitigate the damages caused to him by the Defamatory Words, Mr.

Brown delivered a Notice of Libel to the defendants on February 23, 2018. Mr. Brown

expressly notified the defendants that the Defamatory Words and the innuendo arising

from them, were false and defamatory, and sought the immediate broadcast and

publication of a full apology and retraction. At no time have the defendants formally

corrected, retracted or apologized for their false, malicious and defamatory reporting

and the damage to Mr. Brown that arose from it. Rather, the defendants continue to

strenuously defend their reporting and reaffirm the truth of the Defamatory Words and

the innuendo arising from them.

76. Twenty days after the airing of the January 24 Broadcast and the publication of the

January 24 Article, it became public that Accuser 1 was not underage and was not in

high school at the relevant time, contrary to what was repeatedly reported by the

defendants. Rather than apologize to Mr. Brown for their egregious error, the

defendants treated their false, malicious and defamatory reporting in relation to

Accuser 1 and the innuendo of illegal conduct as inconsequential.

77. Further, the defendants continue to broadcast and/or publish online that Mr. Brown

illegally provided alcohol to an underage high school girl, knowing that it is false.
35

78. The malicious, high-handed, callous, oppressive and arrogant conduct of the

defendants warrants an unprecedented award of punitive, aggravated and exemplary

damages to reflect the exceptional harm done to Mr. Brown and to ensure that the

defendants are appropriately punished for their conduct and that they and others are

deterred from such conduct in the future.

April 23, 2018
JULIAN PORTER, Q.C.
Suite 1600, 1 First Canadian Place
100 King Street West
Toronto, Ontario M5X 1G5
LSO No. 10104E

Tel: 416-862-4297
Fax: 416-862-7661
Email: julian.porter@julianporterqc.com

WINKLER DISPUTE RESOLUTION
39 Glenayr Rd.
Toronto, Ontario M5P 3B9

Howard Winkler and Eryn Pond
LSO Nos. 23943N / 44013I

Tel: 416-519-2344
Fax: 416-915-6325
Email: hwinkler@winklerlawllp.com
epond@winklerlawllp.com

Lawyers for the Plaintiff
PATRICK BROWN and CTV, A DIVISION OF BELL MEDIA INC., et al.

Plaintiff Defendants

Court File No.

ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

Proceeding commenced at BARRIE

STATEMENT OF CLAIM

JULIAN PORTER, Q.C.
Suite 1600, 1 First Canadian Place
100 King Street West
Toronto, Ontario M5X 1G5
LSO No. 10104E

Tel: 416-862-4297
Fax: 416-862-7661
Email: julian.porter@julianporterqc.com

WINKLER DISPUTE RESOLUTION
39 Glenayr Rd.
Toronto, Ontario M5P 3B9

Howard Winkler and Eryn Pond
LSO Nos. 23943N / 44013I

Tel: 416-519-2344
Fax: 416-915-6325
Email: hwinkler@winklerlawllp.com
epond@winklerlawllp.com

Lawyers for the Plaintiff

Related Interests