The Supreme Court of Canada (“the Court”) has recognized that expression promoting equality by countering harmful speech is worthy of heightened protection because of its relation to Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms [Charter] s. 15(1) values, which bring it closer to the core values animating s. 2(b).
If one is engaged in public discourse, are comments that might damage another’s reputation protected? This is the question to be taken up in Glen Hansman v Barry Neufeld, SCC Case No. 39796, and a central concern of anti-SLAPP legislation, which seeks to strike a balance between protecting reputation and the value of rigorous debate. […]
Last Monday, the Ontario Court of Appeal (“ONCA”) released two decisions back-to-back involving the Canadian Broadcasting Company’s (CBC) controversial investigative report on the chicken content of chicken sandwiches manufactured by Subway Franchise Systems of Canada Inc. This post focuses on Subway Franchise Systems of Canada Inc. v Canadian Broadcasting Corporation 2021 ONCA 25 [Subway]. The […]
Legislation against strategic lawsuits against public participation [“anti-SLAPP legislation”] is not a blanket legal apparatus. Parties cannot get claims against them dismissed simply because their expressions are in relation to matters of public interest. Lascaris v B’nai Brith Canada, 2019 ONCA 163 [Lascaris] is a case that explores this concept further. Factual Overview The […]
Does protecting an individual’s freedom of expression supersede protecting those harmed by it? Where does the public interest lie within this analysis? These are the questions that the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) grappled with in the recent decision of Bent v Platnick, 2020 SCC 23 [Platnick], decided alongside 1704604 Ontario Ltd. v Pointes Protection Association, 2020 SCC 22 [Pointes]. This […]
The Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC” or “the Court”) in early September released its much-anticipated decisions in 1704604 Ontario Ltd. v Pointes Protection Association, 2020 SCC 22 [Pointes] and Bent v Platnick, 2020 SCC 23 [Bent]. In Pointes and Bent, the Court was tasked with interpreting s. 137.1 of the Ontario Courts of Justice Act, […]
Introduction It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them. – Mark Twain, Following the Equator What does harm to the reputation of a polarizing public figure entail? What is the […]
As the extensive reach of the Internet continues to blur borders, so too are issues of legal jurisdiction increasingly entwined. Courts are now frequently called upon to reconcile a once novel question: are our current laws still appropriate in a digital age? The rise of the Internet particularly challenges Canadian courts to determine when they […]
In the past few months, Canadians have focused, often in disbelief, on the spectacle that is the 2016 United States Presidential Election. The latest controversy revolves around a New York Times article entitled “Two Women Say Donald Trump Touched Them Inappropriately.” Regardless of its contents, the article’s title alone is enough to send any political campaign into […]
Judges should assume facts in claims are true when considering whether to strike out a pleading under Rule 21 of Ontario’s Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rules”). In a case earlier this month, Gaur v Datta, 2015 ONCA 151, the Ontario Court of Appeal overturned a motion judge’s ruling in a 3-0 decision, allowing the appellants […]