Listen to this article
Estimated 3 minutes
The audio version of this article is generated by AI-based technology. Mispronunciations can occur. We are working with our partners to continually review and improve the results.
A jury has found that an Ottawa-based lawyer who represented survivors of St. Anne’s Residential School defamed the Timmins-based law firm Wallbridge Wallbridge in letters she wrote more than ten years ago.
The case centred on comments made by Fay Brunning in emails in 2014 and 2015.
At the time, Brunning was representing clients previously represented by the Wallbridge firm, helping them to re-apply for compensation under the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement.
In a series of emails, Brunning inquired about files from an OPP investigation, and asked whether Wallbridge had signed an agreement with the federal government and the Catholic Church to not disclose those documents.
The jury agreed with the plaintiff that Brunning’s words injured the firm’s reputation when she made the accusation, and that it was substantially untrue.
In other letters, Brunning alleged the firm’s lawyers had access to updated files and failed to use that evidence to help clients.
While the jury found no damages against the principals of the firm, James and Almeida Wallbridge, it did assess nominal damages at $50,000 for the firm of Wallbridge, Wallbridge.
During closing arguments, the lawyer representing Wallbridge, Wallbridge, told the jury that to suggest the firm was negligent in serving clients, was a serious blow to the firm’s reputation.
“At the end of the day, what the defence has done, has picked at every sore that they found, and was unsuccessful. It doesn’t add up to negligence,” said Geoff Adair.
Adair said while a couple of Brunning’s accusations were couched as opinions, several were stated as fact.
Brunning’s lawyer Tina Hill argued during the trial that Brunning was acting as counsel on behalf of her clients and their best interests, that the comments were not spread to a wide audience, and that there was no evidence of harm caused to law firm.
As for the accusation that Wallbridge, Wallbridge signed an agreement with the federal government and the Catholic Church to not disclose evidence, Hill argued Brunning believed the accusation to be true, based on circumstantial evidence. But in 2022, she said Brunning learned it wasn’t true, and issued an apology to seven people and also sent it to some media outlets.
In a news release from the law firm, it said it is considering appealing the amount of damages.
The legal costs of the trial and proceedings over the past 10 years will be argued and determined before Justice Mark Edwards at a time in the future.
The release said the firm acted for approximately 300 residential school survivors between 1998 and 2017 and quoted James Wallbridge’s testimony from the trial that “this is the case we are most proud of.”