Ont. moves to stop frivolous 'chill' lawsuits
By Jane Sims, The London Free Press
By Jane Sims, The London Free Press
It's proposing legislation, the Protection of Public Participation Act, it hopes will stop so-called SLAPPs -- strategic lawsuits against public participation -- often used to quash criticism and tie up the courts.
"The proposed law would minimize the time and resources wasted by plaintiffs, defendants and the courts on meritless claims, while allowing legitimate complaints to proceed in a timely manner," the attorney general's office said Monday.
The new law was drafted after extensive consultations starting in 2010. An advisory panel concluded strategic lawsuits were stopping many people from speaking out on matters of public interest.
The law would be a "fast-track review process for lawsuits alleged to be strategic in nature," the attorney general's office said.
A judge would be given powers to apply a legal test to determine if the case could proceed or be dismissed. A request to dismiss would be heard within 60 days.
Sam Trosow, an associate law professor and specialist in information policy at Western University, said the proposal is "very good."
"It's a good idea and it's what a modern progressive legal system should do," he said.
Too often, he said, SLAPP tactics silence critics and "constitute a chill on the exercise of freedom of expression."
He noted recent lawsuits filed against opponents of large-scale wind farms in rural Ontario and, in London, a lawsuit threat against an animal activist who discussed a recent veterinarian disciplinary decision.
The legislation, he cautioned, will have to balance addressing SLAPP suits without stopping people from filing legitimate lawsuits.
ABOUT SLAPPs
-- Strategic lawsuits that threaten court action, to intimidate opponents and discourage them from speaking out.
-- Most, filed as defamation claims, have little or no merit and are often dropped before reaching trial.
LONDON, Ont. -- The Ontario government wants to halt the growing practice of using meritless lawsuits as a way to muzzle opponents.
It's proposing legislation, the Protection of Public Participation Act, it hopes will stop so-called SLAPPs -- strategic lawsuits against public participation -- often used to quash criticism and tie up the courts.
"The proposed law would minimize the time and resources wasted by plaintiffs, defendants and the courts on meritless claims, while allowing legitimate complaints to proceed in a timely manner," the attorney general's office said Monday.
The new law was drafted after extensive consultations starting in 2010. An advisory panel concluded strategic lawsuits were stopping many people from speaking out on matters of public interest.
The law would be a "fast-track review process for lawsuits alleged to be strategic in nature," the attorney general's office said.
A judge would be given powers to apply a legal test to determine if the case could proceed or be dismissed. A request to dismiss would be heard within 60 days.
Sam Trosow, an associate law professor and specialist in information policy at Western University, said the proposal is "very good."
"It's a good idea and it's what a modern progressive legal system should do," he said.
Too often, he said, SLAPP tactics silence critics and "constitute a chill on the exercise of freedom of expression."
He noted recent lawsuits filed against opponents of large-scale wind farms in rural Ontario and, in London, a lawsuit threat against an animal activist who discussed a recent veterinarian disciplinary decision.
The legislation, he cautioned, will have to balance addressing SLAPP suits without stopping people from filing legitimate lawsuits.
The Judiciary of the Ontario Superior Court are "experts" at "SLAPP" orders which are designed to stop anyone expressing an opinion, in the court of public opinion regarding the cess pool of corrupt personalities who are used to Select Judges who are of the least suitable group in society who are most likely to abuse their unaccountable Judicial powers.
Increasingly, judges like Alan Sheffield, Jennifer Belishen, Linhares Desousa are experts at muzzeling any criticizm or criminalizing anyone who criticizing the Judiciary.
Justice Maria Linhares Desousa is perhaps one of the most notorious abusers of judicial powers who engages in what judges refer to as "judicial misconduct". That's the civil expression judges use to describe each other's criminal offence of "obstruct justice".
Justice Maria Linhares Desousa is typical of the vile corrupt underbelly of the Ontario Superior Court Judiciary in that she knowingly obstructs justice to abuse children and protect criminals from accountability especially when they are local extreme feminist lawyers.
Judges have an obligation for objectivity and impariality, two qualities you won't find with judges of the Corrupt Superior Court of Ontario where Political Fascist agendas of Promoting Domestic violence against fathers is the name of their game.
Ottawa Mens Centre