Publication Bans and Interim Mandatory Injunctions in the Context of Freedom of Expression and the Privacy of Youthful Victims

Photo: Flickr/ Sebastien Wiertz

The Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta in R v Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, 2016 ABQB 204 (CanLII) (CBC QB) denied an interim mandatory injunction and allowed the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) to retain past posts with identifying information of a youthful victim on the CBC website. The Crown appealed the denial of the interim mandatory injunction. The Majority at the Court of Appeal held that the Chambers Judge applied the wrong legal test, that the injunction is a civil matter attached to a criminal charge, and that the Chambers Judge had considered a number of irrelevant factors. Thus, the Court of Appeal overturned the prior decision and granted an interim mandatory injunction. In my previous blog post, I criticized the Court of Queen’s Bench decision because that decision gave priority to freedom of expression of the media over a young victim’s privacy rights. One of the major purposes of a publication ban is to protect a child victim’s privacy and thereby ensure future victims will come forward with the assurance of anonymity. In R v Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, 2016 ABCA 326 (CanLII) the Court granted the interim mandatory injunction and maintained the integrity of the administration of justice by protecting the identity of the youthful victim in public interest.

Read More
Website AdministratorComment
Selim v Alberta: Reasonableness is Not Always Fairness

Photo: Flickr/ roseflrerlslng

This case involves a judicial review, on a standard of reasonableness, of a refusal by the Information and Privacy Commissioner to conduct an inquiry stemming from a decision by the Calgary Police Service (CPS) to close an access to information request file. The decision of Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench Justice J.B. Veit hinges on the legislative intent behind the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIPPA), RSA 2000 c F-25, and the authority of the Commissioner to refuse to conduct an inquiry, as well as on the reliability of the evidence on which the Commissioner relied in making the decision. However, the decision in this case has wider implications that fall outside of the scope of judicial review, and points to a striking lack of accountability on the part of CPS when it comes to the conduct of one of its own. Rather than address the magnitude of the injustice to which the appellant was subjected in this case, Justice Veit focuses almost exclusively on applying a standard of reasonableness in reviewing the decision of the Commissioner.

Read More
Website AdministratorComment
Legalizing Marijuana Use in Canada: Some Concerns

Photo: Flickr/Tomas de Aquino

The possession of marijuana in Canada is unlawful under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, SC 1996, c 19 (CDSA), but the use of marijuana is legalized for medical purposes under the Marijuana for Medical Purposes Regulations, SOR/2013-119 (“MMPR”). However, as far back as 2013, Canada’s Liberal Party expressed its intention to legalize marijuana use for recreational purposes. After winning the election in 2015, the current federal government has stated that it intends to legalize marijuana use for recreational purposes within the next year.  This article discusses the main potential concerns regarding the decision to broaden the legalized use of marijuana.

Read More
Website AdministratorComment
Genetic Discrimination is Being Addressed in Canadian Law

Photo: Flickr/ Thomas Hawk

With many recent advances in technology, testing can disclose information about people’s health that was not available even a few years ago. For example, genetic testing can reveal that a person has a gene mutation that causes or increases the risk of an inherited disorder. This information may be very important to the individual, but may also cause concern if employers or insurance companies obtain that information and make decisions about hiring or coverage based on genetic information.

Read More
Payday Lending and Debt Cycles: the Act to End Predatory Lending and Criminal Interest Rates

Photo: Flickr/Gord Fynes

Over the last decade, the exorbitant interest rates charged on payday loans have been the subject of multiple class action proceedings against payday lenders in provinces across Canada. Most recently, in Ontario, a class action against Cash Store and Instaloan concluded last summer with a $10 million settlement in favour of the plaintiffs, which potentially number 100,000 (“Class action settlement for borrowers of Cash Store and Instaloans” CBC News (7 July 2016) online: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/payday-loans-illegal-1.3668316).

Read More
Age Discrimination in Long Term Disability Plans: Reasonableness Not Required in Alberta

Photo: Flickr/ Grant Neufeld

This case demonstrates grievance arbitration panels’ shared jurisdiction with the Alberta Human Rights Commission on human rights issues. It also shows one of the fairly rare circumstances when individuals (or their employers) can effectively contract out of human rights protection. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 1007 represented Darrell McGowan in a grievance wherein he asserted that he was forced to resign and access his pension instead of being able to access his long term disability (LTD) benefits. The LTD Policy negotiated between McGowan’s employer (Epcor) and its third party benefits provider (Sun Life) expressly excluded access to LTD benefits for people “who retire or those who are eligible to retire with a full pension” (Re Epcor Utilities Inc. and IBEW, Local 1007 (McGowan), 2015 CarswellAlta 1657 (IBEW Arbitration) at 2).

Read More
Human Rights Cannot Be Renounced or Waived

Photo: Flickr/ AFS-USA Intercultural Pro....

The Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta recently upheld a human rights decision that found Webber Academy, a private school in Calgary, had unlawfully discriminated against two Muslim high school students by prohibiting them from performing certain prescribed Sunni prayers at school. Dr. Webber, President and Chairman of Webber Academy, said that bowing and kneeling was too overt and such prayers would be not allowed on campus. The Alberta Human Rights Tribunal in 2015 found that Webber Academy discriminated against the two students and awarded the students $12,000 and $14,000 respectively as damages for distress, injury and loss of dignity (see 2015 AHRC 8 (CanLII)). The Academy did not explicitly claim that the complainants had waived their rights prior to enrollment. However, on appeal Justice GH Poelman addressed the issue of waiver, as the pre-enrollment discussions between the students and staff were discussed at length by the Tribunal.  Justice Poelman held that waiver is not a possible defence in any case, as human rights are a matter of public policy and protect the inherent dignity of every individual; thus they “cannot be waived or contracted out of” (at para 106).

 

Read More
Website AdministratorComment
Gender Equality in Canadian Politics

Photo: flickr/ Asian Development Bank

There is a long-standing concern about the under-representation of women (and minorities) in our political system. There are several theories about why these groups are not reflected in politics in ways that represent their numbers in Canada. The issue has been recognized, and recently, a proposed amendment was introduced in Parliament and received second reading: Bill C-237, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (gender equity)(First Session, Forty-second Parliament, 64-65 Elizabeth II, 2015-2016). Will this proposed amendment, if implemented, actually result in any change in the gender balance in Parliament?

Read More
Website AdministratorComment
Freedom of Expression, Publication Bans and the Media

Photo: flickr/ Aphrodite

The issue of publication bans in the context of criminal matters ordered by the courts became more complex with the advent of the Internet. Some may remember when the criminal proceedings of Karla Homolka were subject to a publication ban. There were several alleged breaches of the ban when the close proximity to the United States and the inability for an Ontario court order to apply to the United States, coupled with public access to the Internet, effectively nullified the court’s order. In addition, in 2005, author Stephen Williams was sentenced for violating a publication ban by including details of the criminal activities of Homolka and Paul Bernardo in two books (Nick Pron and Robert Benzie, “Bernardo Author called ‘a criminal’ Stephen Williams guilty of breaking publication ban” Toronto Star (15 January 2005) online:http://www.thefreeradical.ca/moviesBernardo/articlesOnStephenWilliams.html).

 

Read More