4(2)(b) of the PPPA, on one side of the public interest weighing exercise, the factor to be considered in favour of the public interest in continuing the proceeding is the likely harm to the plaintiff as a result of the defendant’s expression. [...] 4(2)(b) of the PPPA, what is required of a plaintiff is not to prove harm or causation but only to provide evidence for the judge to draw an inference of likelihood in respect of the existence of the harm and the relevant causal link. [...] The seriousness of the harm can be inferred from the gravity of the impugned statements, and allegations of hate speech rank high on the scale of seriousness. [...] The greater the reputation of the defendant, the greater the impact that defamation can be expected to have on the plaintiff. [...] The role of the court in the public interest weighing exercise under the PPPA is not and should not be to evaluate the soundness of the parties’ respective positions on an issue.
- Pages
- 104
- Published in
- Canada
