Legal Blog

Privacy

Yenovkian v. Gulian 2019 Ont SCJ

Matrimonial matter in which one of the issues related to the right to privacy. Father, who was represented throughout but not at trial, was a nasty piece of work. He engaged in a continuing process of online bullying, attacks on the administration of justice, and false reports to childcare services and police. The court recognized the final tort in the American four-tort catalogue: publicity that places a plaintiff in a false light in the public eye. The other 3 torts had been previously recognized in Ontario. The wrong is in publicly representing someone, not as worse than they are, but as other than they are. Although facts being adduced for this cause of action will often be sufficient to prove defamation, defamation is not required. The judge ordered damages of $100,000 in this category.

Written by Jonathan Speigel, the founding partner of Speigel Nichols Fox LLP, leads the litigation and construction practices.