Court clarifies rules
CRISTIN SCHMITZ OTTAWA

Derogatory remarks that might be seen as libelous when made in other forums may be viewed less seriously in the freewheeling debates that characterize political blogs and message boards, suggests a groundbreaking Internet defamation ruling from Ontario’s Superior Court.

Left-wing blogger John Baglow, who sued after right-wing blogger Roger Smith described him on a conservative message board in 2010 as “one of the Taliban’s more vocal supporters,” is appealing the Aug. 30 summary judgment which tossed out his defamation suit against Smith, and Connie and Mark Fournier, the operators of the blog/message board FreeDominion, said Baglow’s counsel Peter Burnet of Ottawa’s Jones Horwitz Bowles Burnet.

Whether a statement is judged to be libelous should not differ based on whether it was made in the “blogosphere” or “in any other form of written communication,” Burnet told The Lawyers Weekly.

“It would be our submission
that that could properly be an
issue relating to [assessing the
quantum of] damages.”
Added Burnet, “using his
Honour’s test for blogging,
what would be defamatory? If
there are special contexts in
blogging debates which go to
the character of whether or not
a statement is libelous, could
they not be used to defend
using just about any invective
against a blogger?”
Burnet and the defendants’
counsel, Barbara Kulaszka of
Brighton, Ont., agreed that the
case is important for potentially
clarifying the ground rules for
defamation in the context of
Internet debates.

“This is the first Canadian
judgment that analyzes, in a
comprehensive manner, the
context of political blogging in a
defamation case,” Kulaszka told
The Lawyers Weekly. “Just as a
TV broadcast is a different con-
text from a newspaper context,
blogging has its own unique
culture and expectations, which
the judgment recognized.”
Justice Peter Annis’s judg-
ment recognizes that the
medium of message boards is

Why statutory claims
remain arbitrable
PAGE 9
DOMAIN NAMES
Ont. CA rules URLs are
personal property
PAGE 13
FRAUD
New fraud scams against
lawyers pop up often
PAGE 20
Ottawa lawyer Peter Burnet acted for a blogger in a suit that resulted in a groundbreaking Internet defamation ruling.

ROY GROGAN FOR THE LAWYERS WEEKLY

See Bloggers Page 2
THE LAWYERS WEEKLY
Vol. 22, No. 27 NEWS FOR THE LEGAL PROFESSION December 6, 2002
THE LAWYERS WEEKLY
VOL. 22, NO. 27 NEWS FOR THE LEGAL PROFESSION DECEMBER 6, 2002
LUNCH

The British Columbia Court
of Appeal will rule on the ambit
of the taxman’s statutory
authority to examine books and
records — and in particular
whether that power may be
used as part of a general survey
of certain types of taxpayers or
is confined to a “serious inquiry
into the tax liability of a par-
ticular individual.”
On Aug. 29, Justice Anne
Rowles granted the federal
Crown leave to appeal decisions
below which threw out tax eva-
sion and related charges against
the operators of a restaurant
known as Sushi Man: R. v. He.

Noting that the issue raised
by the case was a novel one, she
explained that “the importance
of how the statutory provisions
are to be interpreted is of
importance both to the practice
and to the public generally. It is
also my view that what might be
considered the routine use of
electronic technology employed
in tandem, both as a means of
monitoring compliance with a
self-reporting tax system, and
as a means of securing evidence
for criminal prosecution, has
ramifications that engage the
interests of justice, including
the privacy interests that under-
pin” the Charter’s s. 8 protec-
tion against unreasonable
search and seizure.

Counsel for two of the three respondent taxpayers, Vancouver’s Greg DelBigio, told The Lawyers Weekly the case is “really important” because “it

BCCA to rule on taxman’s power to examine books

See Tax Page 24
CRISTIN SCHMITZ THE LAWYERS WEEKLY
VOL. 22, NO. 27 NEWS FOR THE LEGAL PROFESSION DECEMBER 6, 2002
Is the power lunch still
relevant?
PAGE 21
To ensure your clients get the most comprehensive coverage in one title insurance policy,
take a look at the TitlePLUS® Program1, your Bar-related® real estate partner!
1-800-410-1013
titleplus.ca

1 Please refer to the policy for full details, including actual terms and conditions. The TitlePLUS policy is underwritten by Lawyers’ Professional Indemnity Company (LAWPRO®)/ Assurance LAWPRO®. Assurance LAWPRO is the registered name used in Québec by Lawyers' Professional Indemnity Company. Contact LA WPRO for brokers in Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Alberta and Québec. TitlePLUS policies issued with respect to properties in Québec and OwnerEXPRESS® policies do not include legal services coverage.