A bad day for Barry Neufeld: As hate-speech human rights hearing continues, he learns his defamation appeal falls flat

BC Court of Appeal finds no error in BC Supreme Court decision awarding $45,000 for his defamation of school trustee Carin Bondar

Disgraced former Chilliwack school trustee Barry Neufeld is on the witness stand at day six of BC Human Rights Tribunal (BCHRT) hearing filed by the B.C. Teachers Federation (BCTF) regarding alleged hate speech today (Feb. 24, 2025).

Barry's a busy guy. His day just got worse as the highest court in the Province dismissed his appeal of a BC Supreme Court (BCSC) decision against him for his defamation of current trustee Carin Bondar.

In the decision posted today (Feb. 24, 2025), the three-panel Appeals court found that Neufeld's arguments regarding "fair comment" and "qualified privilege" both fell flat and the original judge made no errors.

Regarding fair comment, the defence requires, in part, that the comment was regarding a topic that most people would know about. In referring to Bondar as a "striptease artist," he was referencing her parody science video.

"While it was not disputed that the controversies around SOGI and Dr. Bondar’s videos were widely known, it does not follow that the contents of the videos were so notorious as to be readily or already familiar to Mr. Neufeld’s audience."

Regarding qualified privilege, the judges agreed with the BCSC decision that it did not apply in this case.

Regarding the decision around damages, the court again found that the BCSC. decision was just.

"Mr. Neufeld, throughout his written and oral submissions on appeal, consistently characterized his comments about Dr. Bondar as 'innocuous,'" Justice David Harris wrote on behalf of the three justices. "Saying this, however, does not make it so. The judge found that these comments caused significant distress and upset to Dr. Bondar, and that they were objectively offensive and demeaning to her. These is no basis, in my view, to interfere with the judge’s modest award of general damages under these circumstances."

Summarizing the decision, Justice Harris found the defamation to be real and the trial judge made no errors.

"The judge made no reviewable errors in finding that Mr. Neufeld’s statement was defamatory and that the defences raised were not available. His award of damages is entitled to deference and was reasonable on the record before him."

Editor's note: I did write recently that I thought the decision should be overturned, I am not a lawyer. While Neufeld's defamation case against Glen Hansman was dismissed by the Supreme Court of Canada, the cases are clearly different and there are many nuances of law regarding both cases. The BC Court of Appeal actually referenced parts of the Neufeld v. Hansman case as a precedent in the Bondar v. Neufeld case.

-30-

Paul J. Henderson
pauljhenderson@gmail.com
facebook.com/PaulJHendersonJournalist
instagram.com/wordsarehard_pjh
x.com/PeeJayAitch
wordsarehard-pjh.bsky.social