How have courts dealt with innuendo?

Saskatchewan, Canada


The following excerpt is from Meier v. Klotz, 1927 CanLII 269 (SK QB):

Some of the words in question here are not ordinary English words; the plaintiff by the innuendo specified the defamatory sense in which he claimed the words were understood, but has given no evidence to show they were so understood, and so failed to establish a cause of action. Major v. McGregor (1903) 6 O.L.R. 528.

Other Questions


How have courts dealt with dangerous play surfaces in tennis courts? (British Columbia, Canada)
How have courts dealt with a claim by the great aunt and her husband for state funded counsel in a child protection proceeding? (Ontario, Canada)
How have the courts dealt with the administration of an estate? (Ontario, Canada)
How have the courts dealt with cases where a lawyer was found to have allowed, encouraged and abetted the unauthorized practice of law? (Ontario, Canada)
How have the courts in BC dealt with the issue of separation in the context of separation and separation? (British Columbia, Canada)
How have courts dealt with a claim for reimbursement by the trustees of a long term disability plan that precluded double indemnity? (British Columbia, Canada)
How have the courts in England and Wales dealt with a mortgagee's claim for unpaid rent? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
How have the courts in B.C. dealt with a renewal of a licence? (British Columbia, Canada)
How have courts dealt with a teenager’s preferences? (Ontario, Canada)
How have the courts in BC dealt with the issue of Affidavits in the Special Case? (British Columbia, Canada)