Skip to main content
CFE Initiative

Intervening in Courts Cases

Many issues related to expressive freedom and the public’s right to know are adjudicated by Canadian courts. The Centre for Free Expression identifies key cases in which it seeks leave to intervene to add perspectives that will aid the court in its deliberations. CFE has been granted intervener status in cases at the Supreme Court, Federal Court of Appeal, Federal Court, provincial courts of appeal, and provincial courts.

CFE Court Submissions
Copies of CFE factums and other submissions made to courts as interventions in a variety of cases related to expressive freedom and the public right to know.
Judges Judging Judges
By Leslie Green

Justice David Spiro assisted the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA), along with B’nai Brith, in blocking an appointment to the Directorship of the Law School’s International Human Rights Program (IHRP) at the University of Toronto. CIJA did not approve of Dr Valentina Azarova’s supposed stand on Palestinian’s rights. There was an international outcry; the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) investigated and then censured the University of Toronto.
Supreme Court of Canada Affirms Access to Justice and Freedom of Expression
By Faisal Bhabha and Madison Pearlman

On June 23, 2022, the Supreme Court of Canada (the “SCC”) released its decision in British Columbia (Attorney General) v Council of Canadians with Disabilities unanimously upholding the right of public interest organizations to mount legal challenges on behalf of members of marginalized communities.
Supreme Court of Canada Takes A Second Look at Anti-SLAPP Legislation
By Justin Safayeni - On January 13, 2022, the Supreme Court surprised many observers by agreeing to hear the appeal in Neufeld v Hansman, a relatively obscure anti-SLAPP case from British Columbia.
The Supreme Court’s judgments on Ontario’s anti-SLAPP legislation: Seven key takeaways
By Justin Safayeni - On September 10, 2020, the Supreme Court of Canada released its highly anticipated decisions in two cases addressing the interpretation and application of Ontario’s “anti-SLAPP” laws. The two appeals — 1704604 Ontario Ltd. v. Pointes Protection Association and Bent v.