Broadly, Canadians can be held liable by English-Canadian courts for comments on public affairs, about public figures, which are factually true, and which are broadly believed.
[...]
In a 2006 commentary comparing Canadian laws with US and Commonwealth laws at that time, the situation was described thus:
“For all the lofty quotes about free speech in Canadian jurisprudence, the reality is that our libel laws are the least protective of free speech in the English-speaking world.
Libel law developed in an ancient era which we would today consider backward, tyrannical and repressive. It is rooted in 16th and 17th century criminal statutes protecting nobility from criticism. Cases of political libel and eventually damages actions were handled by the infamous Star Chamber until its abolition in 1641. By the end of that century, many elements of the common law of libel we would recognize today had been established. In Law of Defamation in Canada, Professor Brown notes that the common law of defamation has been described by scholars and judges as "artificial and archaic" and characterized by "absurdities", "irrationality", and "minute and barren distinctions" (pp. 1–3).
While social values and legal concepts have evolved dramatically of the past 200 years, the common law of libel in Canada remains startlingly unchanged." --
Accordingly, most pre-2006 commentary on defenses and tactics remains valid, although the more recent case law and constantly changing standards require defamation lawyers (on both sides) to study almost every recent case.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
