Defamation & Media Law

A single defamatory post online can harm a professional or personal reputation on a global scale, while potentially controversial communication creates liability risk. From bloggers and website owners who bypass publication bans to new independent websites that emerge every day—making it difficult to control information flows—the media industry faces increasingly unique challenges.

Our lawyers are at the forefront of developing innovative, targeted strategies that protect our clients’ reputations and defend their freedoms around publication bans, libel, privacy, access to information and freedom of the press. We can help to:

defend your interests when someone else is using your information
address publication bans
remove or manage defamatory postings that can hurt one’s personal, business or industry standing

We provide experienced counsel to:

businesses
individuals
print, internet, radio and broadcast media

Experience

Regularly represent and advise national and local television, radio, newspaper, magazine, and internet media clients in defamation claims, applications for media access to court exhibits, sealing orders, publication bans, and pre-publication advice.
Regularly represent both plaintiffs and defendants in defamation claims, particularly complex commercial defamation cases.
R. v. Pickton, R. v. Malik and Bagri (Air India): various media applications for print and television media.
R. v. Trott, R. v. Ertmoed: obtained access to court files regarding videotaped confessions in murder cases.
Anumba v. The Minister of Employment and Immigration: set aside publication ban and court closure regarding refugee claimant fearing prosecution by headhunters.
Ironworkers Local 97 v. Gordon Campbell, the Liberal Party of BC, Southam Inc. and Brian Kieran: defence co-counsel in a libel claim, resulting in the dismissal of claim following trial.
Lasik v. TLC: prosecuted defamation action between Canada’s two largest laser-eye surgery corporations.
Rogacki v. Belz: successfully holding favourable jury verdict on behalf of plaintiff in a defamation case.
Porter v. The York Regional Police Services Board et al. successfully defended multi-party defamation claim.
Supreme Auto Group Inc. v. Chief William Blair, 2020 ONSC 1223: successfully defended the Chief of Police in a defamation action arising from comments made at a press conference

Regularly represent and advise national and local television, radio, newspaper, magazine, and internet media clients in defamation claims, applications for media access to court exhibits, sealing orders, publication bans, and pre-publication advice.
Regularly represent both plaintiffs and defendants in defamation claims, particularly complex commercial defamation cases.
R. v. Pickton, R. v. Malik and Bagri (Air India): various media applications for print and television media.
R. v. Trott, R. v. Ertmoed: obtained access to court files regarding videotaped confessions in murder cases.
Anumba v. The Minister of Employment and Immigration: set aside publication ban and court closure regarding refugee claimant fearing prosecution by headhunters.
Ironworkers Local 97 v. Gordon Campbell, the Liberal Party of BC, Southam Inc. and Brian Kieran: defence co-counsel in a libel claim, resulting in the dismissal of claim following trial.
Lasik v. TLC: prosecuted defamation action between Canada’s two largest laser-eye surgery corporations.
Rogacki v. Belz: successfully holding favourable jury verdict on behalf of plaintiff in a defamation case.
Porter v. The York Regional Police Services Board et al. successfully defended multi-party defamation claim.
Supreme Auto Group Inc. v. Chief William Blair, 2020 ONSC 1223: successfully defended the Chief of Police in a defamation action arising from comments made at a press conference