Political libel
Encyclopedia
The criminal statutes protecting nobility from criticism in 16th and 17th century England eventually evolved into various categories of political libel (see slander and libel
for the modern incarnation of this law). Cases of political libel and eventually damages actions were handled by the infamous Star Chamber
until its abolition in 1641. By the end of that century, many elements of the common law of libel had been established.
Modern slander and libel
law evolved since then to mostly eradicate the use of libel laws to intimidate active political participants during a public debate. Accordingly this is now a matter of historical interest only in all jurisdictions other than Canada, where use of the law by government, political and religious groups is common, and often used against defendants outside Canada.
, general recognition of chilling effects, and sometimes formal definition of a strategic lawsuit against public participation
, serve to limit politically-motivated libel suits. Many attorneys advise strongly against filing any suit against critics with political motivations. The McLibel case is usually cited as libel law backfiring.
Many jurisdictions established such difficult tests for application of libel law to political statements, even exempting specific types or processes of criticism, that any specifically or overtly political comment has been effectively exempted from tort law:
. Burnett says "Internet publication by media outlets opens the door wide to forum shopping
, raising concerns that Canada will become a haven for libel plaintiffs who likely would not succeed in their more natural forum." Several online journalism forums in Canada have closed or restricted access drastically due to the exposure to nuisance or vexatious litigation
.
and the Washington Post - a practice known as 'forum shopping
'. Burnett says "they likely have good legal advisers who correctly tell them that Canadian libel laws favour plaintiffs... our libel laws are the least protective of free speech in the English-speaking world."
, based in Australia, was launched against p2pnet.net, to silence critics of the company and its founder. The case was not launched, however, in Australia but in British Columbia, that being seemingly an example of this forum shopping.
legislation, they have made use of the libel law's provisions intended to stop political critics of powerful church figures.
in the 1980s, its courts have rejected US-style limits on libel law. While it was neither a political case or one about the freedom of religion
, in Hill v. Church of Scientology of Toronto
[1995] S.C.J. No. 64, Justice Peter Cory, for the Supreme Court of Canada
, stated, “I simply cannot see that the law of defamation is unduly restrictive or inhibiting”. However, other English speaking countries have ruled differently. From about 1994 to 2006, according to Burnett, "the highest courts in England, Australia and New Zealand have all recognized that the traditional law of libel fails to adequately protect free speech, and they have all issued decisions which begin to right the balance. Every one, that is, except Canada."
, even from political party leaders in or on the eve of an election, are subject to the same rules of libel as other statements made under other circumstances.
, then Prime Minister of Canada
Paul Martin
vowed to sue Leader of the Opposition (Canada)
Stephen Harper
for stating that the Liberal Party of Canada
's behaviour resembled "organized crime
". Harper continued to mock Martin during the election with political advertising and public appearances showing money being abused and hinting that Liberals were inclined to steal taxpayers' money by nature. No lawsuit was filed and Harper won the election. However, the attempt to curb the language of the Prime Minister's chief rival on the eve of an election was widely noted.
and the comments focused solely on this involvement, without mentioning his business activities at all, the case was seemingly another political libel instance. The party itself had threatened to file at least one lawsuit during the same election as the Martin-Harper incident, against former staff member Matthew Pollesel. While the Party claimed that suits were in response to reports in the press and Elections Canada
regarding the party's internal finances, nothing was ever filed when Pollesel's lawyer notified the Green Party that, under Canadian libel law, an organization cannot be libeled. The threatened suit, however, had the effect of demonstrating that its purpose had been to suppress political comment during the election, and not an attempt to recover any actual damages from any actual harms suffered.
launched a lawsuit March 13, 2008 against the Liberal
s over statements published on the party's website concerning the Chuck Cadman affair. This was the first time a sitting prime minister had sued the opposition for libel. The $2.5-million suit names the Liberal party, the Federal Liberal Agency of Canada and the unnamed author, or authors, of the statements published on the Liberal website two weeks ago. The articles at the centre of the lawsuit are headlined "Harper knew of Conservative bribery" and "Harper must come clean about allegations of Conservative Bribery". Those statements question Stephen Harper's alleged involvement in financial "offers" made to Cadman to sway his vote in a crucial 2005 Commons showdown. The suit filed Thursday in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice does not name Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion
or MPs Ralph Goodale
and Michael Ignatieff
- whom Harper also threatened to sue.
Dona Cadman
says that prior to the May 2005 Budget vote, Tom Flanagan
and Doug Finley, two Conservative Party
officials, offered her husband, Chuck Cadman, a million-dollar life insurance policy in exchange for his vote to bring down the Liberal government. An audio tape suggests then-opposition leader Stephen Harper
was not only aware of a financial offer to Chuck Cadman but gave it his personal approval.
Government agencies in Canada have also sometimes used the private defamation lawsuits against their critics. More recently, the constitutional soundness of such actions have been examined closely by courts in the provinces of British Columbia (2009) and Ontario (2006) and these actions have been rejected outright on a preliminary basis as contrary to section 2 (b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Both the BC Civil Liberties Association and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association were successful in bringing motions to dismiss Government claims for alleged defamation on a preliminary basis.
In the Dixon v. Powell River case (2009 - BCSC), the mere threat of civil litigation by a local government was deemed to have an illicit "chilling effect" on the freedom of speech, contrary to constitutional protections.
The Quebec Contextual approach - the Rawdon test-case
In the Province of Quebec, a civil law jurisdiction, the common law approach to defamation in other provinces which would lead to the outright rejection of ill-founded Government defamation claims on a preliminary basis does not apply automatically. In Quebec, these matters must, in theory, proceed to trial to determine the factual basis and context of such allegations.
In 2008, a test-case seeking to affirm that local Quebec municipalities can indeed sue for "alleged civil defamation on a Government" was initiated by small town of Rawdon, Quebec
with funding and other material support from the Union des municipalités du Québec against certain internet bloggers and others. If successful, the mere threat of such litigation would thus remain a tool for local municipal councils to silence and intimidate critics, where such actions would be strictly prohibited in every other Canadian province.
Even before getting to trial, a Superior Court judge in Quebec issued an unprecedented interim injunction "not to defame the Municipality of Rawdon pending suit." This unfathomable injunction became the object of much criticism by academics, the press, Canadian and other civil liberties groups who note that "freedom of expression, freedom of information, and freedom of the press cannot be said to co-exist with any such judicial interim order".
The Quebec Court of Appeal is set to address the lawfulness of any such an interim order in February 2010. Quebec-based newspapers and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association have intervened in the matter.
The Quebec Court of Appeal may then determine the scope of Quebec's new anti-SLAPP legislation.
(a quasi-Federal Government agency) started against a neighbourhood residents group - Community Air
. The group opposed the Port Authority's support for expanded service at the downtown Toronto City Centre Airport
. The suit claims that the agency and its executive board has been defamed by comments posted on the advocacy groups website. This has also been called a SLAPP suit.
Slander and libel
Defamation—also called calumny, vilification, traducement, slander , and libel —is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation a negative image...
for the modern incarnation of this law). Cases of political libel and eventually damages actions were handled by the infamous Star Chamber
Star Chamber
The Star Chamber was an English court of law that sat at the royal Palace of Westminster until 1641. It was made up of Privy Counsellors, as well as common-law judges and supplemented the activities of the common-law and equity courts in both civil and criminal matters...
until its abolition in 1641. By the end of that century, many elements of the common law of libel had been established.
Modern slander and libel
Slander and libel
Defamation—also called calumny, vilification, traducement, slander , and libel —is the communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government, or nation a negative image...
law evolved since then to mostly eradicate the use of libel laws to intimidate active political participants during a public debate. Accordingly this is now a matter of historical interest only in all jurisdictions other than Canada, where use of the law by government, political and religious groups is common, and often used against defendants outside Canada.
No longer exists in most English speaking jurisdictions
In most developed countries, a combination of discouragement to vexatious litigationVexatious litigation
Vexatious litigation is legal action which is brought, regardless of its merits, solely to harass or subdue an adversary. It may take the form of a primary frivolous lawsuit or may be the repetitive, burdensome, and unwarranted filing of meritless motions in a matter which is otherwise a...
, general recognition of chilling effects, and sometimes formal definition of a strategic lawsuit against public participation
Strategic lawsuit against public participation
A strategic lawsuit against public participation is a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition....
, serve to limit politically-motivated libel suits. Many attorneys advise strongly against filing any suit against critics with political motivations. The McLibel case is usually cited as libel law backfiring.
Many jurisdictions established such difficult tests for application of libel law to political statements, even exempting specific types or processes of criticism, that any specifically or overtly political comment has been effectively exempted from tort law:
- Recognizing the chilling effect of such laws, American courts reformed libel law to protect free speech on matters of public interest, where plaintiffs bear onusOnusOnus, from Latin, indicates accountability/responsibilityOnus may also refer to:* Blame* Burden * Burden of proof...
of proving falsehood, fault and damage. All statements of opinion are immune from liability. This includes almost all political statements. - In Australia the traditional common law was deemed to be “tilted too far against free communication.” (Theophanous p. 20) and courts recognized privileges for political discussion and eventually a new 2006 uniform Defamation Act in Australia.
- The British House of LordsHouse of LordsThe House of Lords is the upper house of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Like the House of Commons, it meets in the Palace of Westminster....
recognized in 2001 a new test for a case-by-case privilege for publications which, though otherwise actionable, dealt with a matter of public concern in a manner which was reasonable and balanced in all the circumstances. They recognized an obligation to protect journalismJournalismJournalism is the practice of investigation and reporting of events, issues and trends to a broad audience in a timely fashion. Though there are many variations of journalism, the ideal is to inform the intended audience. Along with covering organizations and institutions such as government and...
. - New Zealand's Defamation Act includes a qualified privilegeQualified privilegeThe defense of qualified privilege permits persons in positions of authority or trust to make statements or relay or report statements that would be considered slander and libel if made by anyone else...
for non-reckless and non-sentimental statements about political figures.
Canada
However, the direction of Canadian libel law has markedly differed from that in other English speaking countries. While Canadian lawyers, like those in other countries, advise strongly and publicly against legal intimidation of political critics, the Law of Defamation in Canada notes that the common law of defamation has been described by scholars and judges as “artificial and archaic” and characterized by “absurdities”, “irrationality”, and “minute and barren distinctions” (p. 1-3). Dan Burnett argued that "other 'free and democratic societies' have concluded that the traditional common law requires reform" to avoid infringing free expression and political freedom, but Canada has not. It also inhibits online journalismOnline journalism
Online journalism is defined as the reporting of facts when produced and distributed via the Internet.As of 2009, audiences for online journalism continue to grow...
. Burnett says "Internet publication by media outlets opens the door wide to forum shopping
Forum shopping
Forum shopping is the informal name given to the practice adopted by some litigants to get their legal case heard in the court thought most likely to provide a favorable judgment...
, raising concerns that Canada will become a haven for libel plaintiffs who likely would not succeed in their more natural forum." Several online journalism forums in Canada have closed or restricted access drastically due to the exposure to nuisance or vexatious litigation
Vexatious litigation
Vexatious litigation is legal action which is brought, regardless of its merits, solely to harass or subdue an adversary. It may take the form of a primary frivolous lawsuit or may be the repetitive, burdensome, and unwarranted filing of meritless motions in a matter which is otherwise a...
.
Forum shopping
The definition of libel deviates so significantly in Canada, particularly English Canada, that plaintiffs outside Canada bring libel suits against non-Canadian defendants such as the New York PostNew York Post
The New York Post is the 13th-oldest newspaper published in the United States and is generally acknowledged as the oldest to have been published continuously as a daily, although – as is the case with most other papers – its publication has been periodically interrupted by labor actions...
and the Washington Post - a practice known as 'forum shopping
Forum shopping
Forum shopping is the informal name given to the practice adopted by some litigants to get their legal case heard in the court thought most likely to provide a favorable judgment...
'. Burnett says "they likely have good legal advisers who correctly tell them that Canadian libel laws favour plaintiffs... our libel laws are the least protective of free speech in the English-speaking world."
p2pnet.net
A suit by the founder of KazaaKazaa
Kazaa Media Desktop started as a peer-to-peer file sharing application using the FastTrack protocol licensed by Joltid Ltd. and operated as Kazaa by Sharman Networks...
, based in Australia, was launched against p2pnet.net, to silence critics of the company and its founder. The case was not launched, however, in Australia but in British Columbia, that being seemingly an example of this forum shopping.
Religious plaintiffs
While religious figures and movements have recourse to other laws including hate crimeHate crime
In crime and law, hate crimes occur when a perpetrator targets a victim because of his or her perceived membership in a certain social group, usually defined by racial group, religion, sexual orientation, disability, class, ethnicity, nationality, age, gender, gender identity, social status or...
legislation, they have made use of the libel law's provisions intended to stop political critics of powerful church figures.
Hill v. Scientology
Despite Canadian adoption of the US-style written Canadian Charter of Rights and FreedomsCanadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a bill of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada. It forms the first part of the Constitution Act, 1982...
in the 1980s, its courts have rejected US-style limits on libel law. While it was neither a political case or one about the freedom of religion
Freedom of religion
Freedom of religion is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or community, in public or private, to manifest religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship, and observance; the concept is generally recognized also to include the freedom to change religion or not to follow any...
, in Hill v. Church of Scientology of Toronto
Hill v. Church of Scientology of Toronto
Hill v. Church of Scientology of Toronto [1995] 2 S.C.R. 1130 was a libel case against the Church of Scientology, in which the Supreme Court of Canada interpreted Ontario's libel law in relation to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms....
[1995] S.C.J. No. 64, Justice Peter Cory, for the Supreme Court of Canada
Supreme Court of Canada
The Supreme Court of Canada is the highest court of Canada and is the final court of appeals in the Canadian justice system. The court grants permission to between 40 and 75 litigants each year to appeal decisions rendered by provincial, territorial and federal appellate courts, and its decisions...
, stated, “I simply cannot see that the law of defamation is unduly restrictive or inhibiting”. However, other English speaking countries have ruled differently. From about 1994 to 2006, according to Burnett, "the highest courts in England, Australia and New Zealand have all recognized that the traditional law of libel fails to adequately protect free speech, and they have all issued decisions which begin to right the balance. Every one, that is, except Canada."
Political plaintiffs
An aspect of this favouring of plaintiffs is unconcern with their political position, and the viability of political libel suits from Canada that might fail from elsewhere. In Canada, statements about politicsPolitics
Politics is a process by which groups of people make collective decisions. The term is generally applied to the art or science of running governmental or state affairs, including behavior within civil governments, but also applies to institutions, fields, and special interest groups such as the...
, even from political party leaders in or on the eve of an election, are subject to the same rules of libel as other statements made under other circumstances.
Martin and Harper
Just prior to the Canadian federal election, 2006Canadian federal election, 2006
The 2006 Canadian federal election was held on January 23, 2006, to elect members of the Canadian House of Commons of the 39th Parliament of Canada. The Conservative Party of Canada won the greatest number of seats: 40.3% of seats, or 124 out of 308, up from 99 seats in 2004, and 36.3% of votes:...
, then Prime Minister of Canada
Prime Minister of Canada
The Prime Minister of Canada is the primary minister of the Crown, chairman of the Cabinet, and thus head of government for Canada, charged with advising the Canadian monarch or viceroy on the exercise of the executive powers vested in them by the constitution...
Paul Martin
Paul Martin
Paul Edgar Philippe Martin, PC , also known as Paul Martin, Jr. is a Canadian politician who was the 21st Prime Minister of Canada, as well as leader of the Liberal Party of Canada....
vowed to sue Leader of the Opposition (Canada)
Leader of the Opposition (Canada)
The Leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition , or simply the Leader of the Opposition is the leader of Canada's Official Opposition, the party with the most seats in the House of Commons that is not a member of the government...
Stephen Harper
Stephen Harper
Stephen Joseph Harper is the 22nd and current Prime Minister of Canada and leader of the Conservative Party. Harper became prime minister when his party formed a minority government after the 2006 federal election...
for stating that the Liberal Party of Canada
Liberal Party of Canada
The Liberal Party of Canada , colloquially known as the Grits, is the oldest federally registered party in Canada. In the conventional political spectrum, the party sits between the centre and the centre-left. Historically the Liberal Party has positioned itself to the left of the Conservative...
's behaviour resembled "organized crime
Organized crime
Organized crime or criminal organizations are transnational, national, or local groupings of highly centralized enterprises run by criminals for the purpose of engaging in illegal activity, most commonly for monetary profit. Some criminal organizations, such as terrorist organizations, are...
". Harper continued to mock Martin during the election with political advertising and public appearances showing money being abused and hinting that Liberals were inclined to steal taxpayers' money by nature. No lawsuit was filed and Harper won the election. However, the attempt to curb the language of the Prime Minister's chief rival on the eve of an election was widely noted.
Green Party of Canada
The "open politics" service openpolitics.ca was sued by Wayne Crookes and West Coast Title Search in 2006 for permitting republication of comments and facts made on mailing lists and printed in mainstream news articles, and additional comment on these. As Crookes was deeply involved in the Green Party of CanadaGreen Party of Canada
The Green Party of Canada is a Canadian federal political party founded in 1983 with 10,000–12,000 registered members as of October 2008. The Greens advance a broad multi-issue political platform that reflects its core values of ecological wisdom, social justice, grassroots democracy and...
and the comments focused solely on this involvement, without mentioning his business activities at all, the case was seemingly another political libel instance. The party itself had threatened to file at least one lawsuit during the same election as the Martin-Harper incident, against former staff member Matthew Pollesel. While the Party claimed that suits were in response to reports in the press and Elections Canada
Elections Canada
Elections Canada is an independent, non-partisan agency reporting directly to the Parliament of Canada. Its ongoing responsibility is to ensure that Canadians can exercise their choices in federal elections and referenda through an open and impartial process...
regarding the party's internal finances, nothing was ever filed when Pollesel's lawyer notified the Green Party that, under Canadian libel law, an organization cannot be libeled. The threatened suit, however, had the effect of demonstrating that its purpose had been to suppress political comment during the election, and not an attempt to recover any actual damages from any actual harms suffered.
Stephen Harper vs Liberal Party
PM Stephen HarperStephen Harper
Stephen Joseph Harper is the 22nd and current Prime Minister of Canada and leader of the Conservative Party. Harper became prime minister when his party formed a minority government after the 2006 federal election...
launched a lawsuit March 13, 2008 against the Liberal
Liberal Party of Canada
The Liberal Party of Canada , colloquially known as the Grits, is the oldest federally registered party in Canada. In the conventional political spectrum, the party sits between the centre and the centre-left. Historically the Liberal Party has positioned itself to the left of the Conservative...
s over statements published on the party's website concerning the Chuck Cadman affair. This was the first time a sitting prime minister had sued the opposition for libel. The $2.5-million suit names the Liberal party, the Federal Liberal Agency of Canada and the unnamed author, or authors, of the statements published on the Liberal website two weeks ago. The articles at the centre of the lawsuit are headlined "Harper knew of Conservative bribery" and "Harper must come clean about allegations of Conservative Bribery". Those statements question Stephen Harper's alleged involvement in financial "offers" made to Cadman to sway his vote in a crucial 2005 Commons showdown. The suit filed Thursday in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice does not name Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion
Stéphane Dion
Stéphane Maurice Dion, PC, MP is a Canadian politician who has been the Member of Parliament for the riding of Saint-Laurent–Cartierville in Montreal since 1996. He was the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada and the Leader of the Opposition in the Canadian House of Commons from 2006 to 2008...
or MPs Ralph Goodale
Ralph Goodale
Ralph Edward Goodale, PC, MP was Canada's Minister of Finance from 2003 to 2006 and continues to be a Liberal Member of Parliament...
and Michael Ignatieff
Michael Ignatieff
Michael Grant Ignatieff is a Canadian author, academic and former politician. He was the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada and Leader of the Official Opposition from 2008 until 2011...
- whom Harper also threatened to sue.
Dona Cadman
Dona Cadman
Dona Cadman is a Canadian politician, who represented the electoral district of Surrey North in the Canadian House of Commons from 2008 to 2011, as well as the widow of Chuck Cadman, a former Member of Parliament for the same district. She served in the Conservative Party of Canada...
says that prior to the May 2005 Budget vote, Tom Flanagan
Tom Flanagan (political scientist)
Thomas Eugene Flanagan is an American-born political science professor at the University of Calgary, author, and conservative political activist. He also served as an advisor to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper until 2004. Flanagan's scholarship has focused on Native and Metis rights in...
and Doug Finley, two Conservative Party
Conservative Party of Canada
The Conservative Party of Canada , is a political party in Canada which was formed by the merger of the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada in 2003. It is positioned on the right of the Canadian political spectrum...
officials, offered her husband, Chuck Cadman, a million-dollar life insurance policy in exchange for his vote to bring down the Liberal government. An audio tape suggests then-opposition leader Stephen Harper
Stephen Harper
Stephen Joseph Harper is the 22nd and current Prime Minister of Canada and leader of the Conservative Party. Harper became prime minister when his party formed a minority government after the 2006 federal election...
was not only aware of a financial offer to Chuck Cadman but gave it his personal approval.
Government plaintiffs
Common law provincesGovernment agencies in Canada have also sometimes used the private defamation lawsuits against their critics. More recently, the constitutional soundness of such actions have been examined closely by courts in the provinces of British Columbia (2009) and Ontario (2006) and these actions have been rejected outright on a preliminary basis as contrary to section 2 (b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Both the BC Civil Liberties Association and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association were successful in bringing motions to dismiss Government claims for alleged defamation on a preliminary basis.
In the Dixon v. Powell River case (2009 - BCSC), the mere threat of civil litigation by a local government was deemed to have an illicit "chilling effect" on the freedom of speech, contrary to constitutional protections.
The Quebec Contextual approach - the Rawdon test-case
In the Province of Quebec, a civil law jurisdiction, the common law approach to defamation in other provinces which would lead to the outright rejection of ill-founded Government defamation claims on a preliminary basis does not apply automatically. In Quebec, these matters must, in theory, proceed to trial to determine the factual basis and context of such allegations.
In 2008, a test-case seeking to affirm that local Quebec municipalities can indeed sue for "alleged civil defamation on a Government" was initiated by small town of Rawdon, Quebec
Rawdon, Quebec
Rawdon is a municipality located on the Ouareau River in southwestern Quebec, Canada, 45 minutes north of Montreal. It is the seat for the Regional County Municipality of Matawinie, in the Lanaudière region...
with funding and other material support from the Union des municipalités du Québec against certain internet bloggers and others. If successful, the mere threat of such litigation would thus remain a tool for local municipal councils to silence and intimidate critics, where such actions would be strictly prohibited in every other Canadian province.
Even before getting to trial, a Superior Court judge in Quebec issued an unprecedented interim injunction "not to defame the Municipality of Rawdon pending suit." This unfathomable injunction became the object of much criticism by academics, the press, Canadian and other civil liberties groups who note that "freedom of expression, freedom of information, and freedom of the press cannot be said to co-exist with any such judicial interim order".
The Quebec Court of Appeal is set to address the lawfulness of any such an interim order in February 2010. Quebec-based newspapers and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association have intervened in the matter.
The Quebec Court of Appeal may then determine the scope of Quebec's new anti-SLAPP legislation.
Toronto Port Authority
In 2006 the Toronto Port AuthorityToronto Port Authority
The Toronto Port Authority is a Canadian port authority responsible for management of the harbour of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, including the Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport...
(a quasi-Federal Government agency) started against a neighbourhood residents group - Community Air
Community Air
Community Air is a non-profit resident association in the city of Toronto, Canada that seeks to have the Toronto Island Airport) shut down and its lands converted to park land. The association is concerned about noise, pollution and safety aspects of the airport's operation...
. The group opposed the Port Authority's support for expanded service at the downtown Toronto City Centre Airport
Toronto City Centre Airport
Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport , commonly known as the Toronto Island Airport is an airport located on the Toronto Islands in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. It is named after Air Marshal Billy Bishop, a Canadian First World War flying ace...
. The suit claims that the agency and its executive board has been defamed by comments posted on the advocacy groups website. This has also been called a SLAPP suit.
Sources
- Lawyers Weekly article by Dan Burnett, October 27, 2006.
- Law of Defamation in Canada, Brown
- American cases demonstrating restrictive US definition of libel: Gertz v. Welch, 418 U.S. 323, Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., 497 U.S. 1, New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254.
- Australian cases: Theophanous v. The Herald and Weekly Times Ltd. (1994), 124 Aust. L.R. 1 (H.C.) and Lange v. Australian Broadcasting (1997) 145 A.L.R. 96 (H.C.A.).
- English cases: Jameel v. Wall Street Journal [2006] UKHL 44
- Canadian cases:
- We are all journalists now, column by Michael GeistMichael GeistMichael Allen Geist is a Canadian academic, and the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-Commerce Law at the University of Ottawa. Geist was educated at the University of Western Ontario where he received his Bachelors of Laws before going on to get his Masters of Laws at both Osgoode Hall Law...
, published in Toronto StarToronto StarThe Toronto Star is Canada's highest-circulation newspaper, based in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Its print edition is distributed almost entirely within the province of Ontario...
, June 5, 2006 and also republished by the British Broadcasting Corporation - GPC whistleblower crisis, 2006
- GPC Council crisis
- Crookes versus openpolitics, filed in BC Superior Court, May 2006
- We are all journalists now, column by Michael Geist
- NZ cases: Lange v. Atkinson [2000] 3 NZLR 385