Former Sing Tao reporter suing for wrongful dismissal
《大中报》记者泰瑞-戴维森（Terry Davidson）(2010-07-09 PM04:51),
一名曾为多伦多《星岛日报》工作的记者，因写了两篇被法庭下令禁止报道的、有关一个性侵犯的法庭审判的详细报道，之后被报社解雇，目前他正在起诉这家媒体，告对方不当解雇。
A former reporter for the Toronto Sing Tao newspaper is suing the media outlet for wrongful dismissal after being fired for writing two court stories containing details of a sexual assault trail that was under a publication ban.
这两篇报道涉及2007年的一起法庭审判——一个华人男子被指控性侵犯他的继女。法庭下令此审判不得报道，主要是为了保护这名女孩的身份，因为当时她还未成年。
The stories involved the 2007 trial of a Chinese man charged with sexually assaulting his stepdaughter. The trail had been placed under a publication ban, mainly to hide the identity of the stepdaughter because she was a minor at the time.
这两篇报道被指控其细节能够让读者认出那个女孩的身份，而它们均出自身为记者和编辑的李阳之手。结果，女孩的母亲以诽谤为由，把《星岛》告上法庭，声称两篇报道中的内容并不属实，是诽谤和在审判前偏袒被告。
The articles about the trial, written by reporter and editor Kelvin Li, allegedly contained details enabling readers to identify the stepdaughter. As a result, the mother of the girl brought a libel action against Sing Tao, claiming also the information in the articles was inaccurate, defamatory and preferential toward the defendant prior to the trail.
去年，这位母亲状告《星岛》的官司在庭外和解。
The mother’s lawsuit against Sing Tao was settled out of court last year.
但是，李阳在诉讼状中声称解雇他是不对的，因为《星岛》“没有建议、也没有培训过他如何报道有法庭禁止报道令的故事。”但是，《星岛》说它曾给所有的编辑人员，包括李阳，提供过有关诽谤法和法庭报道方面的讲座和“书面材料”。
But Li says in his statement of claim he was wrongfully let go because Sing Tao “had not advised, nor trained (him) on the subject of court publication bans.” Sing Tao, on the other hand, says it provided all editorial staff, including Li, with seminars and “written materials” on libel law, court reporting and proceedings.
李声称，他的两篇报道在发表前均被《星岛》的头版编辑和主编审阅过。该主编也被《星岛》解雇，但是，头版编辑却被没有被解雇。
Li also claims that the stories were reviewed by both Sing Tao’s front-page editor and the paper’s editor-in-chief prior to publication. The editor-in-chief was also fired, but the front-page editor was able to remain with the paper.
李还指出，《星岛》在对该名女孩母亲的诽谤官司中，将解雇李作为诽谤官司的辩护理由。
Li also claims that Sing Tao pleaded his firing as part of its defense against the libel action of the girl’s mother.
但是《星岛》表示，李之所以被解雇是有足够理由的。《星岛》指控李“没有采取合理的步骤去核实两篇报道中的事实”，没有审核法庭文件，没有问法庭他所写的报道内容是否受法庭禁止报道令约束，没有与声称是受害人的人或与此案的检控官联系。
But Sing Tao states Li was fired with good reason, alleging he “did not take reasonable steps to verify the information contained in the…articles,” and failed to inspect the court file, inquire with the court if there was a publication ban, contact the alleged victims or contact the crown acting in the case.
《星岛》在辩护状中说：“因此，我们认为李应该，而且也熟悉诽谤法和法庭禁止报道令。”
“Accordingly, Li was expected to be, and was, familiar with libel law and publication bans,” reads Sing Tao’s statement of defence.
李声称，在女孩母亲以诽谤为名把《星岛》告上法庭之后，他被叫去解释涉及两篇报道的有关问题时，李没有被告之他应该带上自己的律师。
Li also claims Sing Tao never advised him to bring his own lawyer when he was called in to explain the articles after the mother brought the libel action against the newspaper.
李指出，女孩的母亲曾向法庭申请动议，将他的名字与《星岛》一道列为被告，而《星岛》拒绝让自己的律师在李被解雇后为他辩护，除非李放弃追究《星岛》“解雇（他）所带来的所有责任”。
Li claims a motion was brought by the woman attempting to name him as a defendant along with Sing Tao, and claims that Sing Tao refused to let its lawyers act for him after his dismissal unless he released the paper “from all liabilities arising from (his) dismissal.”
但是，《星岛》在对李的辩护状中说，李被解雇后，他和《星岛》各自用了不同的辩护律师，《星岛》没有责任支付李的律师费。
Conversely, Sing Tao’s statement of defense says when Li was fired, he and the paper were not represented by the same lawyer, and that the newspaper was not obligated to pay his legal costs.
另外，辩护状中还说“作为友好姿态”《星岛》提出自己可以支付李的律师费，但是“要视特定条件而定”。《星岛》的辩护状中没有讲那些条件是什么。
However, the statement of defense also states that Sing Tao offered Li, “as a gesture of goodwill,” legal representation at Sing Tao’s expense, but “contingent on certain terms.” Sing Tao’s statement of defense does not elaborate on what those terms were.
诉状和辩护状均说李拒绝了《星岛》的提议，而且，根据《星岛》的辩护状，把李列为诽谤诉讼被告的法庭申请，没有被法庭批准。
Both statements say Li declined the offer, and according to Sing Tao’s statement of defence, the motion to have Li named as defendant was unsuccessful.
李要求赔偿13万元，外加律师费。赔偿包括8万元他理所应当得到的20个月的工资，以及 由于《星岛》“无情、专横的处理方式”和它的“不公平和因人而异地”将他解雇，而支付一般性赔偿 5万元。
Li is suing for $130,000 plus legal costs. Included in that amount is $80,000 for the 20 months salary he feels he was entitled to, and $50,000 in general damages for the “callous, harsh, high-handed conduct” of Sing Tao and its “unfair and selective” firing of him.
李的律师Chi-Kun Shi最初曾答应接受《大中报》的采访，但随后又取消了采访，称李让她不要对此事发表评论。《大中报》打给李阳的电话和发送的电子邮件均未得到他的回应。
After initially setting up an interview with Chinese News, Li’s lawyer, Chi-Kun Shi, quickly cancelled the scheduled interview saying Li instructed her not to comment on the case. Calls and an email to Kelvin Li for an interview were not returned.
《星岛》的律师对此事同样守口如瓶，包括没有透露此官司目前进行到哪一个阶段。
Sing Tao’s lawyers were equally tight lipped, including about what stage the lawsuit was at in the judicial process.
《星岛》的律师Julie O’Donnell 说：“作为客户代表律师，我将不对此案及与此有关的任何事发表任何评论。”
“I don’t comment at all on behalf of my clients, on any matters,” said Sing Tao lawyer Julie O’Donnell.
根据李的诉状，他从1993年起在《星岛》担任记者的工作，年收入“约2万元”并与之有“无具体期限的聘用”的口头合约。他的工资在他为该报工作的这段时间里得到提升，并且他在2003年被晋升为副总编。
According to his statement of claim, Li began working at Sing Tao in 1993 as a reporter for “about $20,000” per year and under a verbal contract of “indefinite hiring.” He received pay raises throughout his time there, and in 2003 was promoted to deputy editor-in-chief.
在李被解雇时，他担任城市新闻编辑，年薪4.8万左右，外加年终奖金，以及退休金计划、假日薪金、病假薪金，以及牙齿和处方药在内的健康保险。
At the time Li was let go, he was the city assignment editor and was earning around $48,000 annually, plus a yearly bonus, pension plan, holiday pay, sick pay and coverage for dental, prescription drugs and a health plan.
李声称，由于记者人手不够，他常常兼记者的工作，但《星岛》对此予以否定。李还说，他与《星岛》之间的合约有“默认条款”，即除非他被辞退是有理由的，不然《星岛》在解雇他以前应该给出“合理的解雇通知”。
Li claims he periodically doubled as a reporter due to a shortage of reporters at the paper, a claim Sing Tao denies. Li also claims it was an “implied term” of his contract with the newspaper that unless he was fired with cause, Sing Tao would give him “reasonable notice” of his firing.
以上所有指控尚未得到法庭证实。
All allegations and claims above have not been proven in court.
离开《星岛》后，李建立了一个新闻网站。
Since then, Li has started an online news site.
《星岛》在1978年开始在多伦多出版。在提出“努力提高它的编辑内容”和布图设计后，它于1998年加入了《多伦多星报》出版集团。
Sing Tao was launched in Toronto in 1978. After “striving to improve its editorial content” and layout design, it joined the Toronto Star publishing group in 1998.
http://www.chinesenewsgroup.com/SMPApp/design/article.jsp?cate=16&artId=20674
