Supreme court | Conflict of Laws | Torts | Choice of law
Plaintiff was Canadian businessman, who owned popular soccer team in Israel. Defendant was Israeli newspaper, who published article that was critical of owner’s management of team. Article mentioned owner’s Canadian business in article. Article was published in newspaper’s online edition, where it came to attention of owner’s Canadian employees. Owner claimed article was defamatory, and brought action against newspaper in Ontario. Newspaper claimed that proper jurisdiction for action was Israel. Motions judge ruled in favour of owner, with provincial court of appeal upholding motions judgment. Newspaper appealed appeals court judgment to Supreme Court of Canada. Appeal allowed; Ontario action stayed. Motions judge was incorrect in applying factors in forum non conveniens test. There was only limited relationship between alleged tort and Ontario as forum. Article was published with Israeli audience in mind, and reached only limited audience in Ontario through Internet. Majority of witnesses were located in Israel. Owner had significant business interest in Israel, and was well-known to public in that country.
Haaretz.com v. Goldhar (2018), 2018 CarswellOnt 8883, 2018 CarswellOnt 8884, 2018 SCC 28, 2018 CSC 28, McLachlin C.J.C., Abella J., Moldaver J., Karakatsanis J., Wagner J., Gascon J., Côté J., Brown J., and Rowe J. (S.C.C.); reversed (2016), 2016 CarswellOnt 10242, 2016 ONCA 515, Janet Simmons J.A., E.A. Cronk J.A., and S.E. Pepall J.A. (Ont. C.A.).
