Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

===''WE Charity v. CBC''===
On February 8 2022, [[WE Charity]]'s [[New York City|New York]]-based affiliate filed a lawsuit against the CBC for defamation.<ref name=DefamationLawsuit>{{cite news|last=Queen|first=Jack|date=June 28, 2023|title=Canadian Broadcasting Corp must face WE Charity defamation lawsuit, U.S. court rules|website=[[Reuters]]|url=https://www.reuters.com/legal/canadian-broadcasting-corp-must-face-we-charity-defamation-lawsuit-us-court-2023-06-28|access-date=}}</ref><ref name=CanadianLawyer>{{cite news|last=Dino|first=Angelica|date=July 13, 2023|title=US District Court refuses to dismiss defamation lawsuit against Canadian Broadcasting Corporation|magazine=Canadian Lawyer|url=https://www.canadianlawyermag.com/practice-areas/litigation/us-district-court-refuses-to-dismiss-defamation-lawsuit-against-canadian-broadcasting-corporation/377828}}</ref><ref name=ActualMalice>{{cite news|last=Patrice|first=Joe|date=April 18, 2023|title='Actual Malice' Standard Didn't Stop Dominion From Suing Fox News Because Sometimes Networks Leave Whole Paper Trails Of Malice|website=[[Above the Law (website)|Above the Law]]|url=https://abovethelaw.com/2023/04/fox-news-defamation-cbc-actual-malice/|access-date=}}</ref><ref name=Pacer>{{cite web|title=WE CHARITY v. CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION|website=PacerMonitor|url=https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/43488254/WE_CHARITY_v_CANADIAN_BROADCASTING_CORPORATION}}</ref> The 230-page complaint was filed in the [[United States District Court for the District of Columbia]], where the case was assigned to [[United States district judge|district judge]] [[Randolph Moss|Randolph D. Moss]].<ref name=DefamationLawsuit/><ref name=Pacer/>

The lawsuit alleges that, in an hour-long piece for its series [[The Fifth Estate (TV series)|The Fifth Estate]], the CBC broadcast claims by reporters Mark Kelly and Harvey Cashore that the CBC knew to be false, including that WE Charity had exaggerated the number of schoolhouses it had built in [[Kenya]] and deceived donors about how their money had been spent. WE Charity accused the CBC of fabricating quotes and using misleading editing to support what WE called a "preconceived narrative."<ref name=DefamationLawsuit/><ref name=CanadianLawyer/>

Joe Patrice of the [[Above the Law (website)|Above the Law]] website, which covers legal news, reviewed the details of the lawsuit and called it a "mirror image" of [[Dominion Voting Systems v. Fox News Network]].<ref name=ActualMalice/><ref name=ForumNonMotion>{{cite news|last=Patrice|first=Joe|date=July 6, 2023|title=Forum Non Motion Fails In The Face Of Modern Litigation Technology|website=[[Above the Law (website)|Above the Law]]|url=https://abovethelaw.com/2023/07/forum-non-motion-fails-in-the-face-of-modern-litigation-technology/}}</ref> [[Dominion Voting Systems]], originally a Canadian company, choose to sue [[Fox News Network]] in the United States, ultimately settling for $787.5 million.<ref name=Enrich>{{cite news|last=Enrich|first=David|date=April 18, 2023|title=The $787.5 million deal is one of the largest defamation settlements in U.S. history|newspaper=[[The New York Times]] |url=https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/04/18/business/fox-news-dominion-trial-settlement/the-787-5-million-deal-is-one-of-the-largest-defamation-settlements-in-us-history}}</ref> Similarly, WE Charity, whose American operations are incorporated in [[Williamsville, New York]], sued the CBC in the United States, in both instances despite the hurdle of the "actual malice" standard established in [[New York Times Co. v. Sullivan]], which is unique to American law and requires that the defendant either knew that or did not care if its representations were false.<ref name=ActualMalice/> Pattrice writes, "The CBC produced segments claiming that the charity misappropriated donor money… it did not."<ref name=ForumNonMotion/>

On May 4, the CBC's attorneys filed a motion to dismiss the case per ''forum non conveniens'', saying that it would be more appropriately heard before a Canadian court.<ref name=DefamationLawsuit/><ref name=CanadianLawyer/><ref name=ActualMalice/><ref name=ForumNonMotion/><ref name=Pacer/> WE Charity replied on June 10, countering that the CBC's allegations had hindered its fundraising efforts in the United States, where many of its donors are located.<ref name=ForumNonMotion/><ref name=Pacer/> On June 27, Judge Moss denied the CBC's motion, ruling that the case would proceed in the District Court.<ref name=DefamationLawsuit/><ref name=CanadianLawyer/><ref name=ForumNonMotion/><ref name=Pacer/> Moss rejected the CBC's assertion that travel from Canada to the United States was unduly burdensome, and held that the relative ease of modern electronic discovery and document transfer between jurisdictions made the existence of documentary evidence in Canada a negligible hurdle to litigation in the United States.<ref name=ForumNonMotion/> Patrice suggests that, even ten years prior, the CBC's motion might have succeeded, and sees the decision as an example of how the rise of digital media is revolutionizing the legal profession.<ref name=ForumNonMotion/>