Article content continued

But Laurier says that their comments are not defamatory for several reasons, including the fact that they were made in the context of a private meeting.

“They played no role whatsoever in uploading the recording of the impugned words to YouTube, and are not responsible in any way for any repercussions flowing therefrom,” the university says in its statement of defence.

“Rather, these defendants state that the impugned words were uploaded to YouTube by Shepherd, and that she is therefore responsible for the damages, if any, that flowed from the impugned words being broadcast on YouTube.”

Peterson argues in his statement of claim that the comments made in that disciplinary meeting were designed to attack his character and harm his reputation, and the private nature of the conversation isn’t relevant.

“(These comments) were disseminated widely in both social and conventional media and, in turn, by word of mouth,” Peterson says in his suit.

“Although the individual defendants did not personally disseminate and broadcast it they could have reasonably anticipated that, given the nature of their conduct and the position taken by Shepherd at the meeting, that she would inform others of what had occurred.”