The proposed intervener brought a motion for leave to intervene in the Crown's appeal against the respondent's acquittal for public incitement of hatred.
The respondent had been acquitted on the basis that his online statements were not communicated in a "public place" as required by s. 319(1) of the Criminal Code.
The court granted the motion, finding that the interpretation of "public place" in the context of online communications is an issue of wide-reaching impact.
The court concluded that the proposed intervener's submissions on statutory interpretation were sufficiently distinct from the Crown's and would provide useful assistance to the panel.
