Case Law Canada: Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v Whatcott, Supreme Court upholds hate speech provisions – Aileen McColgan

In Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v Whatcott 2013 SCC 11 Canada’s Supreme Court considered the balance between equality rights and rights to freedom of expression and religion.  It upheld the central “hate speech” provisions in the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code, although struck down some of the code’s wording in a case prompted by flyers handed out by a religious anti-gay activist, Bill Whatcott.

Twitter enters the courts in Ontario – Adam Lazier

Under a policy that came into force on February 1, journalist are now allowed to tweet and live-blog proceedings in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, the province’s court that hears civil and major criminal proceedings.  Although the policy has a number of limitations, it marks an important step forward for open courts in Ontario.

Case Law, Canada (Human Rights Commission) v Warman: Hate speech and the Canadian Human Rights Commission – Eloise le Santo

The case of Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Warman, brought by the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC), was a judicial review of a decision by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal not to impose any penalty on Marc Lemire for breaching section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act 1985 (CHRA).

Canada, AB v Bragg Communications: What’s in a Name? Supreme Court allows libel plaintiff to proceed anonymously – Paul Schabas and Adam Lazier

On 27 September 2012 the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision A.B. v. Bragg Communications (2012 SCC 46) a case which deals with the balance between the open courts principle, privacy, and the rights of children.  The Court permitted a teenager to proceed anonymously in her application to find out the identity of her alleged cyberbullies.  The Court did, however, deny her application for a broader publication ban.

Case Law Canada: Baglow v. Smith: libel and online debate, case must go to a trial

A Canadian appeal court has decided that the important question as to the application of the law of defamation to a robust and free-wheeling exchange of political views in the internet blogging world was something which is best resolved after a full trial. In a judgment handed down on 14 June 2012 (2012 ONCA 407) the Court of Appeal in Ontario overturned the first instance decision in Baglow v Smith.

Case Law, Canada: Pridgeon v University of Calgary, Freedom of Expression, University Discipline and Facebook – Aileen McColgan

The use of social media by students to criticise their courses and teachers gives rise to difficult freedom of expression issues. The point has been considered by the courts in a number of jurisdictions, most recently in the Canadian case of Pridgen & Pridgen v University of Calgary ([2012] ABCA 139) which was recently decided by the Court of Appeal in Alberta. The Court held that the University infringed the freedom of expression rights of twin brothers who had been disciplined for criticising a professor on Facebook.

Cyber Bullying, Defamation, and the Right to Remain Anonymous: AB v Bragg Communications before the Canadian Supreme Court – Kirsten Sjøvoll

This case, argued before the Canadian Supreme Court on 10 May 2012, raises interesting issues in relation to the manner in which applications for anonymity are assessed in civil claims. The principle of open justice is constitutionally enshrined in Canada and anonymity orders are difficult to obtain. Should there nonetheless be a relaxation of this principle where a case involves a certain class of claimant, deemed vulnerable by virtue of their age? More particularly, is the protection of children a superior value which the courts must strive to preserve even at the expense of transparency?

The Supreme Court of Canada: internet defamation, choice of law and libel tourism – Antonin I Pribetic

This post is the second of a two-part series of posts on the recent Canadian conflict of laws trilogy in Club Resorts Ltd. v. Van Breda, 2012 SCC  17 (“Van Breda”); Éditions Écosociété Inc. v. Banro Corp., 2012 SCC 18 (“Banro”) and Breeden v. Black, 2012 SCC 19. (“Black”) for Internet defamation, choice of law/forum shopping and libel tourism.  In an earlier post (on the Trial Warrior Blog) I discussed the the Van Breda decision and its implications to Canadian conflict of laws generally. 

News: Canada Rolls Out Welcome Mat for Libel Tourists – Paul B. Schabas and Erin Hoult

The Supreme Court of Canada today released two decisions regarding assumed jurisdiction in defamation matters that leave the door to libel tourism wide-open in Canada.  The two cases – Éditions Écosociété Inc. v. Banro Corp., 2012 SCC 18 and Breeden v. Black, 2012 SCC 19 – involve defamation suits commenced in Ontario against non-resident defendants.

News: Appeal heard in Canadian “no defamation in a blogging dialogue” case, judgment reserved

In September 2011 we had a post about Baglow v Smith, a potentially very significant decision in Canada. The first instance decision of Annis J  suggested that an apparently defamatory statement made in a debate on a blog or internet forum may not be found to be defamatory if the plaintiff previously engaged in the debate but did not respond to the statement despite having the opportunity to do so.