Anti-SLAPP

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.  

An easy mistake to make in any discussion of freedom of expression is to believe there is absolute certainty anywhere in the definition of that term. If you are jumping into a debate on free speech certain you know exactly what you believe (plus all the implications of that belief), chances are you’ve grossly over-estimated your own position. If you’re doing that on Twitter, either get your thumbs familiar with the block/mute functions, or free up a lot of time for an epic Twitter fight unlikely to solve anything for anyone.

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.

The Centre for Free Expression, along with co-intervenors Canadian Association of Journalists and CWA-Canada, welcome today's Supreme Court's unanimous judgment  in 1704604 Ontario Ltd. v. Pointes Protection Association which upholds Ontario's anti-SLAPP legislation and makes some important clarifications about how specific legislative provisions  should be interpreted and applied.

CFE et al. Intervener Factum - Supreme Court of Canada – Anti-SLAPP

News Reports and Commentary Selected by Franklin Carter of the Book and Periodical Council’s Freedom of Expression Committee   In Victoria, the B.C. legislature heard the first reading of Bill 2 — the Protection of Public Participation Act — on February 13, 2019. The bill, which was introduced by Attorney General David Eby, seeks to curtail costly and meritless lawsuits that stifle public debate.