A lawyer and human rights advocate sued for defamation after a charitable organization published articles accusing him of supporting terrorists.
The plaintiff had met with the father of an alleged Palestinian terrorist, expressed sympathy for the father whose home was demolished, and posted about the matter on social media.
The defendant moved to dismiss the action as a SLAPP (Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation) under section 137.1 of the Courts of Justice Act.
The motion judge dismissed the action, finding the defendant had valid defences of fair comment, justification, and qualified privilege.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding the motion judge erred in applying the wrong legal standard and that the plaintiff had met his burden under section 137.1(4)(a)(ii) by showing a reasonable trier could conclude none of the defences would succeed.
The court also found the balancing test under section 137.1(4)(b) favoured the plaintiff.
