Case information

Courts — Dismissal of proceeding that limits debate — Freedom of expression — Matters of public interest — Whether the proceeding has substantial merit — Application of Ontario’s framework for dismissal of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) to negligence claim — Torts — Negligence — Duty of care — Pure economic loss — Proximity — Novel duty of care — Three party relationships — Does an entity (A), such as a laboratory, that undertakes a test or investigation of another entity or its products (B) for the benefit of a third party (C) owe a duty of care to the subjects of its tests or investigations (B) — Whether defendants can use anti-SLAPP provisions to reverse the onus on motions to strike pleadings — 1688782 Ontario Inc. v. Maple Leaf Foods Inc., 2020 SCC 35 — 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 Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (“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 Subway sandwiches was substantially below those sold by the other chains. The report was based on test samples conducted by the respondent Trent University’s Natural Resources DNA Profiling & Forensic Centre (“Trent”).

The applicants (“Subway”) brought an action for defamation against the CBC and Trent and an action in negligence against Trent. CBC and Trent each brought a motion 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 the applicants’ defamation action against it, while Trent only sought to dismiss Subway’s claim in negligence. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice granted CBC’s motion and dismissed the action against CBC, but dismissed Trent’s motion and allowed the negligence action against it to proceed. In two separate appeals, the Court of Appeal for Ontario allowed Subway’s appeal against the CBC, and allowed Trent’s appeal against Subway. The court granted Trent’s s. 137.1 motion and dismissed Subway’s action in negligence against it. Subway’s defamation action against Trent can continue