Anti-SLAPP

CFE Intervener Factum – British Columbia Supreme Court. The issue is whether Vancouver Island University’s request for an injunction should be granted against the encampment on campus. After a review of the legislative context and of Canadian jurisprudence on the applicability of the Charter to specific actions of universities, the factum suggests that the University’s rights as a “property owner” and its statutory powers in the “management of its privately owned land” are not unlimited or absolute; that the University’s statutory power does not necessarily pre-empt or extinguish the Charter freedoms of those using its property for expressive purposes. Finally, the factum submits that, in acting as a singular arbiter for expressive rights on campus, VIU must inform its decisions with a view to the values that underlie Charter rights.

In late 2015, Ontario’s Protection of Public Participation Act, 2015 took effect. Commonly referred to as the “anti-SLAPP” regime—a reference to the term “Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation” from US jurisdictions—the law quickly changed the litigation landscape in Ontario, particularly in defamation actions.  

In Prince Edward Island, the legal dispute between a real estate developer and an environmental organization continues to fuel calls for the provincial legislature to enact an anti-SLAPP law.*

Protection of Public Participation Act, 2015 Centre for Free Expression

The Court of Appeal of British Columbia has ruled that author Steven Galloway may pursue his defamation lawsuit against a woman, whom court documents refer to as A.B., and others.

In a recently released decision, the Supreme Court of Canada reaffirmed the important role of anti-SLAPP legislation in protecting those who speak out on matters of public interest and against whom legal action is taken. In particular, the Court made clear that so called “counter-speech” seeking to defend a vulnerable group weighs in favour of protection.