Case information

Courts — Dismissal of proceeding that limits debate — Freedom of expression — Matters of public interest — Application of Ontario’s framework for dismissal of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) to defamation claim — How should courts approach a responsible communication defence raised by media on an anti SLAPP motion — When, if ever, should courts consider post publication content when assessing the responsible communication defence — 1704604 Ontario Ltd. v. Pointes Protection Association, 2020 SCC 22 — Bent v. Platnick, 2020 SCC 23 — Courts of Justice Act, RSO 1990, c C.43, s. 137.1 (“CJA”).

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

In its Marketplace television program, online media report and Twitter posts to the public, the applicants (“CBC”) reported that only approximately 50% of the DNA in Subway chicken was chicken DNA. The investigative report compared the contents of chicken sandwiches sold by five fast food chains in Canada. The percentage of chicken reported to be in the Subway sandwiches was substantially below those sold by the other chains. The report was based on test samples conducted by Trent University’s Natural Resources DNA Profiling & Forensic Centre (“Trent”). The respondents (“Subway”) brought an action for defamation against CBC and Trent, and also brought an action in negligence against Trent.

CBC and Trent brought motions to dismiss under s. 137.1 of the CJA, on the basis that the lawsuits were strategically aimed at discouraging freedom of expression on a matter of public interest. CBC sought to dismiss Subway’s defamation action against it, whereas Trent only sought to dismiss the respondents’ claim in negligence. A motion judge of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice granted the CBC’s motion and dismissed the defamation action against CBC, but dismissed Trent’s motion and allowed the negligence action against Trent to proceed. On appeal, the Court of Appeal for Ontario allowed Subway’s appeal against CBC, set aside the lower court decision, and allowed the defamation action against CBC to continue. In a separate appeal, the appellate court allowed Trent’s appeal and dismissed Subway’s action in negligence against Trent.