L. Strand

The defendant's anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' defamation action was unsuccessful.

This decision addresses the plaintiffs' request for costs.

Despite a statutory presumption against costs for unsuccessful anti-SLAPP motions under s. 137.1(8) of the Courts of Justice Act, the court exercised its discretion to award partial indemnity costs to the plaintiffs.

The court found that the original lawsuit did not exhibit the characteristics of strategic litigation against public participation (SLAPP) and the impugned expression was not public interest speech.

Considering factors under Rule 57.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, including the complexity and importance of the issues, the court awarded $10,000 in costs to the plaintiffs, reducing the amount claimed due to concerns about the hours spent and the number of lawyers involved.

The defendant brought an anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss a defamation action commenced by a drag performer and a 2SLGBTQI organization.

The action arose from a Facebook post by the defendant that referred to the plaintiffs as 'groomers' in the context of a drag story-time event.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that the expression did not relate to a matter of public interest, but rather perpetuated harmful myths and stereotypes about the 2SLGBTQI community.

The court further held that the defamation claim had substantial merit, the defence of fair comment had no real prospect of success, and the public interest in allowing the plaintiffs to defend their reputations outweighed any public interest in protecting the expression.