The applicant sought a mandatory interlocutory injunction to compel the Leaders' Debates Commission to grant media accreditation to its journalists for the upcoming federal election debates.
The Commission had denied accreditation, relying on guidelines addressing conflict of interest, and the applicant alleged the decision was arbitrary and unfair.
The Court found a strong prima facie case of arbitrary differential treatment in the accreditation process, irreparable harm from being prevented from participating in the political process, and a balance of convenience favouring the applicant.
The injunction was granted.
