ManitobaA judge has dismissed a lawsuit against Manitoba’s New Democrats that was launched after a failed political candidate and anti-vaccination critic claimed he was defamed by one of the party’s hopefuls in 2022.’Necessary and appropriate’ for NDP to call Patrick Allard’s rhetoric ‘racist,’ judge saysOzten Shebahkeget · CBC News · Posted: Oct 16, 2025 5:58 PM EDT | Last Updated: 12 hours agoPatrick Allard, a vaccine critic seen here in 2023, sued Manitoba’s New Democrats after the party said he spouted ‘racist rhetoric.’ The lawsuit was tossed by a judge on Thursday. (Randall McKenzie/CBC)A judge has dismissed a lawsuit against Manitoba’s New Democrats that was launched after a failed political candidate and vaccine critic claimed he was defamed by one of the party’s hopefuls in 2022.Patrick Allard ran as an independent in the 2022 byelection in Manitoba’s Fort Whyte riding to fill former premier Brian Pallister’s empty seat — a race narrowly won by now Manitoba Progressive Conservative Leader Obby Khan.In a written decision released Thursday, Manitoba Court of King’s Bench Associate Chief Justice Shane Perlmutter rejected Allard’s claim he was defamed when Manitoba’s New Democrats described him as someone who spouts “racist rhetoric” in a March 2022 news release provided to the Winnipeg Free Press.The NDP issued the release to explain why their candidate, Trudy Schroeder, did not want to participate in an all-candidates forum proposed by Liberal candidate (and now party leader) Willard Reaves that would have included Allard, Perlmutter’s decision said.”Trudy is happy to have a debate but the Liberal proposal to give Patrick Allard a platform to spout his anti-vaccination and racist rhetoric is wrong,” the NDP’s release said, which is quoted in the decision.The quote was attributed to an unidentified party spokesperson at the time, but was revealed to have been written by Mark Rosner, who is now Premier Wab Kinew’s chief of staff, Perlmutter wrote.Allard — a vocal opponent of Manitoba’s public health measures who was fined nearly $35,000 in 2022 for violating them — said he was defamed because the NDP’s news release implied that he is a racist, which he denies, the decision says.In his testimony, Rosner referred to remarks made on a comment chain — before the news release was issued — under a Facebook post that encouraged people to report those disobeying COVID-19 public health orders, in which Allard said to “turn in any attic hiding jews while you’re at it,” the decision says.Allard testified that his Facebook comments were misconstrued, since he was pointing out how people were encouraged by the government to turn in their Jewish neighbours during 1930s Germany’s persecution of Jewish people, Perlmutter said.Allard testified that he “was not comparing the systemic extermination of six million Jewish people and countless others to the COVID-19 pandemic, but was instead comparing the government’s actions of encouraging people to turn in their neighbours,” Perlmutter wrote.”As objectionable as Mr. Allard’s language, I am not satisfied that it is possible to determine in this instance and context, as a matter of truth or falsity, what spouting racist rhetoric means so as to determine whether in making his two offensive Facebook posts Mr. Allard was, in fact, spouting racist rhetoric.”Allard broke court rulePerlmutter said testimony by Schroeder, Rosner and an NDP volunteer who helped draft the news release reflected their “sincerely held beliefs” that Allard’s rhetoric “was, in fact, racist.”Perlmutter sided with the NDP’s argument that while Allard was defamed, the party’s comments are defensible under qualified privilege — the ability to make statements that might otherwise meet the legal definition of defamation if there’s a legal, moral or social duty to make them.Perlmutter said it was “both necessary and appropriate to the occasion” for the NDP to refer to Allard as spouting “racist rhetoric” in the news release because they were explaining concerns about him having a platform to do so.Allard had sought at least $50,000 in general damages, as well as punitive and aggravated damages.”Had I found in Mr. Allard’s favour, I would have awarded him nominal damages of $1,” Perlmutter wrote.However, the judge found that Allard had breached a court rule that says anyone involved in a matter before the court cannot use evidence or information received during that process for any purpose other than the court proceeding.Allard submitted NDP text messages obtained through the court proceeding to the Winnipeg Sun, Perlmutter said.Perlmutter said he accepted Allard’s explanation that he had inadvertently breached the court rule because he wasn’t aware of it.Perlmutter concluded by saying that he does not want his ruling to be seen as a “license to publish, with impunity, remarks which may be defamatory and untrue about another simply because they are published in the context of an election campaign.””To avoid exceeding [qualified] privilege, the comments in question must be relevant, necessary, and appropriate, as I found them to be in this case,” he wrote.Manitoba NDP spokesperson Evan Krosney, who also testified on behalf of the NDP during the court proceedings, said in a statement to CBC News that the party is pleased with the ruling and is committed to “defending our values in all venues.”CBC News has reached out to Patrick Allard for comment.ABOUT THE AUTHORÖzten Shebahkeget is a member of Northwest Angle 33 First Nation who grew up in Winnipeg’s North End. She has been writing for CBC Manitoba since 2022. She holds an undergraduate degree in English literature and a master’s in writing.Email: ozten.shebahkeget@cbc.ca
Judge tosses anti-vaxxer’s defamation lawsuit against Manitoba’s New Democrats
