Proud Moment Photo: Signing of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms
By 1967, Canada had its own national symbols with all the powers of an independent nation, except one: the power to amend its own Constitution.
Repatriating Canada’s Constitution from the British Parliament was a lengthy, complicated process pursued by many successive federal governments.
Queen Elizabeth II and Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau signed the Proclamation of the Constitution Act on April 17, 1982; it was accompanied by The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
***
Fash Free @dontwantnofash.bsky.social:
The goal of the lawsuit was to silence Nate Pike, and deter anyone else from reporting on the UCP’s dodgy dealings with Sam Mraiche.
At least the bogus ruling that silenced him is gone, even though he will still be dragged through court for a while longer.
@nigelb.bsky.social:
Excellent news.
@bacullenyyc.bsky.social:
A Breakdown in the unjust takedown of the @thebreakdownab.bsky.social
Welcome back Nate Pike!
Alberta political web series back online after judge dismisses injunction by Brendan Ellis, March 03, 2025, CTV News
A court order that forced an Alberta political web series to go dark for more than two weeks has been dismissed by a judge.
Nate Pike’s The Breakdown was ordered to turn its lights off for two weeks following complaints by MHCare and its Edmonton-based CEO, Sam Mriache.
The two-week court order contained two injunctions: a mandatory one ordering The Breakdown to remove content and a prohibitive injunction preventing The Breakdown from publishing any more.
The application was made within a claim alleging defamation against Pike, with the applicants seeking $6 million in damages. Pike has denied the allegations.
The application sought to stop Pike from posting or reposting any words, audio or other content related to Mraiche and MHCare.
The court heard Pike’s appeal last week, and the application for the injunction was dismissed by Justice Bonnie L. Bokenfohr on Monday morning.
The justice said the applicant “did not establish that the defences of justification, fair comment and responsible communication in the public interest will inevitably fail, or that it is beyond doubt that any defence raised by the respondent is not sustainable,” according to a spokesperson with the Court of King’s Bench Alberta.
Over multiple episodes, Pike alleged MHCare was awarded two controversial contracts from the province he believes were sole-sourced and that Mraiche later invited multiple politicians into a free VIP box for Edmonton Oilers playoff hockey games.
In an affidavit, Mriache claimed, “The consequent hate that I am receiving from (The Breakdown’s) readers, listeners, and/or followers, as well as the threats made against myself and MHCare, have caused me to be extremely fearful for my safety, my family’s safety and safety of the employees and agents of MHCare and their families.”
The Breakdown was back on social media Monday, announcing a new episode of the show after two weeks without posts.
With files from CTV News Calgary’s Damien Wood and Timm Bruch
Joe Vipond @jvipondmd.bsky.social Mar 3, 2025:
I hope Nate Pike can read this.
wise advice from a hero of mine:
When they try to silence you, BE LOUDER!
Luke LeBrun @lukelebrun.ca Mar 3, 2025:
NEW: Moments ago, an Alberta Court terminated an injunction against Alberta politics podcast The Breakdown which led it to stop publishing
For more on the bizarre decision that had serious implications for free expression and press freedoms, see this detailed backgrounder from @charlesrusnell.bsky.social in @thetyee.ca
@proftomuofr.bsky.social:
This is the perfect demonstration of why every province needs to have legislation protecting people from SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) cases. The lawsuit (and the injunction) were clearly designed to intimidate The Breakdown into silence. End the injunction, dismiss the case
daily dose of estragon @craigburley.com:
I’m reading this article and I’m… mystified? Appalled? Goggled? By a judge of a superior court saying she’s unfamiliar with the fair comment defence and granting a temporary injunction over it. Right move to delay a ruling til now frankly.
Anyway it all seems to have been resolved quickly-if-maybe-not-quickly-as-you’d-like
Onion on my Belt @arrrdeecee.bsky.social:
I am in no way even up on legalese and procedure, but I did find it odd that the original judge who granted the injunction used the words “not a nice guy” when referring to Pike.
Whether he is or not, isn’t that immaterial?
Tony the Antifascist Swan is sick of Twitter @tonyyvce.bsky.social:
Good. That was total overreach.
ptgr.bsky.social @ptgr.bsky.social:
Yeah. The judge got it very wrong. It appeared she hadn’t read the filings, or at least not in detail.
To me, it sounds like J Sulyma is just another charter-hating Albertan. She ought to have been removed off the bench years ago, in my view, because of how she seems to favour rapists over their victims. Many Albertans, including judges (all those that heard my case) and politicians, hate Canada’s charter – apparently because a Trudeau created it. Albertans are so idiotic they hate and rage against that which protects them and their loved ones from evil.
I find it galling that if J Sulyma did not know what she was doing, or what the law is regarding our charter and injunctions, she ought to have recused herself and offered to find a judge who does know the law instead of ruling on her thinking Nate is likeable. I find him quite likable and J Sulyma most unlikable.
AnnaSova @annasova17.bsky.social:
The comments made by the judge seem VERY biased. “My point is if you go around slandering and defaming people that that is not in the public interest,” Sulyma said.
Slander and defamation have not been proven. That statement is an assumption.
And shouldn’t EVERY Albertan be interested in govt?Especially gov’ts like our UCP that betray us to billionaires and millionaires and are quislings, betraying our country to gain favour with American Nazis currently destroying the USA, threatening to destroy Canada, all the better to serve Russia.
I worry that Pike will not get a fair and unbiased trial. I worry that regular Albertans no longer have freedom to speak against the government, or even question the government. This case is pivotal.
Krista @krisrae.bsky.social:
Anyone who is of voting age should be interested in the “matters of government” and has the right to talk about it. Everyone should also be interested in the “matters of the court” apparently.
Samantha eff Jones @sjonespoet.bsky.social:
uh because EVERY citizen can and should be interested in matters of government. what an asinine thing to say
Alec Walker (he/him) @smartalecw.bsky.social:
“My point is if you go around slandering and defaming people that that is not in the public interest,” Sulyma said.
But slander and defamation haven’t been proven.
And I would say that holding elected officials accountable for their actions is very much in the public interest.
Canadian In Alberta @canadianinalberta.bsky.social:
Exactly
JK @kroganairdrop.bsky.social:
So I’ve been wondering, how are judges selected for cases in Alberta? Going to look that up.
greenglassworm @greenglassworm.bsky.social:
100%.
This is authoritarianism in infancy.
Worst govt in AB history.
NeverVoteConservative
Gene Anderson @geneanderson.bsky.social:
That comment alone from the judge shows a bias that should result in being recused. But I have to remind myself that we have a Legal system, not actually a Justice system. A real just system wouldn’t have allowed a SLAPP suit in the first place.
Gene Anderson @geneanderson.bsky.social:
And why they hell shouldn’t an employee or AHS be concerned in matters of govt? We ALL should be concerned in matters that affect us and that we pay for. WTH is with the judge’s perspective here? Citizens should expect to be engaged with their govt, & as should judges.
Awake in Alberta @reginaphalange94.bsky.social:
Exactly! This affects everybody in this province, they should be asking why the hell other people don’t seem to care what’s going on?!
Canadian In Alberta @canadianinalberta.bsky.social:
I agree with both of you
It’s awful
tkrause.bsky.social @tkrause.bsky.social:
Agree 100%. Appalling!
Be Teachable @alwaysbeteachable.bsky.social:
I had the same reaction when I read this story. AHS employees have considerable stake in these govt decisions, not surprising there is interest.
Canadian In Alberta @canadianinalberta.bsky.social:
Agreed
But regular Albertans should be interested in matters of government
That’s out tax dollars, our healthcare & our lives we’re talking about
The idea that we shouldn’t be interested in government is appalling to me
JustNapalmIt @frankfencepost.bsky.social:
FWIW she’s a fair and decent judge. Not sure why she would make such comments.
Canadian In Alberta @canadianinalberta.bsky.social:
Well said
Lori @1loriking.bsky.social:
Which is wild for judge who supposedly well versed in defamation. So too old, or too daft or ethical Qs?
Tim Robinson @oldgeologist.bsky.social:
I hope the Breakdown AB comes back stronger and louder.
Hazel B. @hab3261.bsky.social:
So many questions about our legal system and how this seemed so easy to silence an ordinary citizen who has an interest in politics.
dangocurt @dangocurt.bsky.social:
I’m guessing that POS Mraiche couldn’t provide any evidence to substantiate his case.
Didn’t the judge give him an ultimatum last week which was essentially “put up or shut up”?
ptgr.bsky.social @ptgr.bsky.social:
IANAL, but I think the standard for the injunction is no possible defence. I’m not sure who has the burden, but obviously Pike has a defence. Several in fact.
Rugged Broad @ruggedbroad.bsky.social:
Lightly @lightlysalted.bsky.social:
Excellent news
Tired Mama G@tiredmamag.bsky.social:
Fan-freaking-tastic!!
Petzie (AMW) @amwpetzie.bsky.social:
Fantastic.
email hidden; JavaScript is required:
This is so awesome!!!!
JeffreyBrooks49 @jeffrey49.bsky.social:
What? They still have independent court system in AB?We don’t, but, this case was too egregious, too anti charter, too anti freedom of the press, and too far out there even for our politicially-and richman-controlled judicial industry to allow to stand.
Canadian Birdie @cdn-birdie.bsky.social:
Great news! Will he be able to resume publishing though?
@KatyET #ABResistance @katyet.bsky.social:
He’s already back! Will be on at 12:00 pm.
@koksilah-kickass.bsky.social:
Awesome news
MagicHummingBird @magichummingbird.bsky.social:
Great news!
grace62.bsky.social @grace62.bsky.social:
Excellent News
enorconhcet @enorconhcet.bsky.social:
Great news! Doesn’t look like it’s hit the news yet, but I’m looking forward to reading more about it.
@charlesrusnell.bsky.social:
Injunction hearing for Breakdown/Nate Pike is done. Judge will issue decision on Monday at 9 a.m. Judge clearly signalled high bar of Pike having no defences to defamation allegations has not been met. February 28, 2025 at 7:01 PM
The judge urged both sides to resolve whatever issues they could over the weekend in relation to content that could be removed. Pike agreed, without any legal admission, to keep all his content offline until Monday.
Sid Kobewka (he/him) @sidjk.bsky.social:
Thanks for the update. It sounds like the lawyers had more time to review and present the law and this will be a good decision
MondoAB @mondoab.bsky.social:
Thanks for your reporting Charles, much appreciated!
Tim W Callaway @canucklehead56.bsky.social:
BRAVO to you, Charles, for keeping us in the loop and we’ll take this as good news for Nate going forward.
Charles Rusnell @charlesrusnell.bsky.social:
It’s not a done deal yet. Judge still has to rule. This is my interpretation of what I heard.
Tim W Callaway @canucklehead56.bsky.social:
Gotcha!And, I expect Mraiche will appeal it (I expect on orders by Dildo Danielle. Lots of dreadfully evil corruption being exposed recently, and her quisling betrayal of Canada to Adolf Orange is unappealing to many Canadians. She’s loathed by the massers, addicted to power, lies incessantly and ultra vulgarly, and is under heaps of pressure to stay on top of the UCP/TBA dung heap from hell
email hidden; JavaScript is required:
What does that mean?
Charles Rusnell @charlesrusnell.bsky.social:
It means The Breakdown should not have been directed to take down its content and to not comment on the ongoing scandal. He will likely be allowed to repost his content, with some modifications, and produce new content, but he would be wise to be more careful in future about what he says.
Judge says it doesn’t appear the high bar for an injunction – that Breakdown/Pike has no defence to the various alleged defamatory statements – is being met. PIke’s lawyers say Pike has defence of fair comment in public interest. Mraiche’s lawyer says Pike showed malice.
And The Breakdown legal defence GoFundMe has passed $200,000
I’m watching the injunction hearing for Nate Pike and The Breakdown. Interesting development.
Pike’s lawyers have indicated they will ask judge to move up time for disclosure in the alleged SLAPP lawsuit. That means they’re forcing Sam Mraiche to move forward and essentially show his evidence.
Brian Mills @preambulator.bsky.social:
The plaintiff might be able to afford a high priced legal team, but from what I see, there is little evidence of defamation when all of Mr. Pike’s studies were based on publicly available information and he invited followers to draw their own conclusions. This could backfire badly IMO.
Samantha eff Jones @sjonespoet.bsky.social:
I think it’s already backfiring badly. It’s all we want to talk about now lol and it keeps coming up in question period.
A Dave you know you know @notjustdave.bsky.social:
The Streisand effect on this has been delicious.
Associate to the Professor Dan Shugar @watershedlab.bsky.social:
What does the first part mean?
Sean @seandunn.bsky.social:
For the injunction to succeed, the court has to find that there’s absolutely no hope of any kind of defense against defamation — a very high bar. The court is saying that bar doesn’t appear to be met, I.e. Nate has plausible defenses
@criticalcapitalist.bsky.social:
Time to put up or shut up, Sam!
Can’t wait for this to get dropped before disclosure because of what Sam is hiding.
PlanetGrin @planetgrin.bsky.social:
Who is acting for Pike and team?
MondoAB @mondoab.bsky.social:
I have read Richard Harrison of Wilson Laycraft
Charles Rusnell @charlesrusnell.bsky.social:
And Shaun Fluker from the U of C.
Graham Feb 27, 2025:
It sounds like the judge got a phone call.
ken akurate Feb 27, 2025:Excellent comment!
“I guess that puts him in the arena,” Sulyma said. “But it is kind of odd that an employee of AHS would be interested in matters of government.”
News flash for Justice Doreen Sulyma: No guessing involved. Every citizen should be allowed to be interested, and express their concerns in matters of government; particularly when government is hostile to the public interest.
@John1MD:
It seems possible that Justice Doreen A. Sulyma is a favourite of conservative governments doing bad things and looking for a defense. Methinks she was hand picked to play a role.methinks too
Kikki Planet @kikkiplanet.bsky.social:
For those following the matter, it will be a different Judge hearing Mraiche v The Breakdown today; Justice Bonnie Bokenfohr.
Will be interesting to see what she thinks of Justice Sulyma’s granting of the injunction against Nate Pike and The Breakdown, as ordered 2 weeks ago.
Shaun O @gohd21.bsky.social:
Yes it will be. Someone had posted a “legal review” of the injunction hearing, and it didn’t sound like that judge really knew what was going on, but granted it anyhow??
¯_(ツ)_/¯
Kikki Planet @kikkiplanet.bsky.social:
She didn’t. I was stunned by her ruling. She doesn’t seem to have even a modicum of understanding about social media, independent journalism, anything.
And to grant an injunction like that without evidence presented to back up Mraiche’s claims of harassment & threats was beyond bizarre.
Ryan Humphrey @ryanhumphrey.bsky.social:
From the Tyee article
““I can say that perhaps Mr. Pike is not such a nice guy but I cannot rule on this, this afternoon,” the judge said”
Which seems a completely bizarre thing to say, particularly at a first hearing. The judge shouldn’t be looking to rule on how “nice” anyone is
Shaun O @gohd21.bsky.social:
Exactly! That stood out to me too. Aren’t rulings supposed to be guided by some law or evidence? Seems like the injunction was passed by favoritism toward the plaintiff….Or, I expect based on orders to the judge from dirty danielle smith
MI Citizen:
… The judge was obviously asleep at the wheel. Pre emptively siding with Mraiche accepting his claims of defamation, slander and endangerment. Making judgements about Nate’s character. Unbelievable.In my view, Sulyma is an awful judge, she ought to have been removed from the bench years ago. She seems keen to protect rapists and not their victims. In Nate’s case, since she admitted she did not know the law involved, she needed to say so, step aside. Terribly abusive to our charter right to freedom of expression, the public interest, freedom of the press, and Nate, while oh so delightfully fabulous for corrupt Danielle Smith, the UCP and theirr rich friends, reportedly getting much richer thanks to taxpayers and destroying our public health care.
Hopefully the judiciary has woken up in the last two weeks and Nate’s lawyer has the facts needed to get this thrown out.Unfortunately, Alberta is a rape-infected, rapist infested corrupt province. To make corruption work smoothly without accountability, requires lots of dirty judges on the bench, and dirty lawyers to enable them. In my view, Alberta’s judicial industry is the dirtiest in Canada.
Nate’s lawyer needs to be transparent about Nate’s role in the public eye and Mraiche’s people have to stop deflecting from matters of truth.
Chuck it out.
All related to this cuz Smith’s gov is like a rats nest cuz every thread leads back to her corruption.
Ucp budget means more poverty fewer jobs worse Healthcare more burden on towns less cooperation more scandal and deceit. …
Peter M:
“My point is if you go around slandering and defaming people that that is not in the public interest,” Sulyma said.
Where was judge Sulyma when the anti Trudeau folks have been publicly labeling him a traitor.
@MargTokar Feb 27, 2025:
To anyone who is questioning a rally for Nate Pike.
We would not promote this without Nate’s support.
I again confirmed with him Wednesday, am.
His reply: “Thanks. I only ask that no individuals be named and focus is on free expression & UCP corruption”.
@gilmcgowan:
Remember when Danielle Smith said “safeguarding freedom of expression” was one of her government’s top priorities? Turns out that, at almost exactly the same time, she was trying to get The Breakdown host, Nate Pike, fired for criticizing her government. #Hypocrisy
@Jay344947760340:
If the threshold for defamation is “people on the internet are being mean to me” we’re absolutely fucked as a society. From my understanding Nate Pike FOIP’d the hell out of GoA, presented those findings and drew some pretty basic conclusions. Citizens are allowed to be pissed.
@meowshell.bsky.social:
This is outrageous.
@e5ther.bsky.social:
The judge sounds biased
nancyjt:
Well, I guess nobody brought a cease and desist motion against them. Be that as it may, it certainly looks like the judge didn’t understand the motion before her and I hope it is overturned tomorrow. I hope The Tyee will follow up on this.
Len Olson @Lenforoffice Feb 27, 2025:
Hey Alberta
Nate Pike and The Breakdown have a court appearance in Edmonton this Friday, Feb 28th, 2025, at 2PM . Please try to attend if you can andmake sure to get there early.
Let’s be sure to show support for the man who has proven to be one of Albertans’ best friends.
Please support whan and how you can!
ABResistance @AB_Resistance:
Just to add to this that we are asking people to not mention Sam Mraiche in any signage, no shouting and not chants. There will be tape for everyone who wants to participate in a mock “Gag Order”.
Tape to put over their mouths of course.
NDA = Non Disclosure Agreement, aka gag.
Podcaster back in court to fight gag order in Alberta health care controversy by David Ebner, Justice Reporter, Feb 27, 2025, The Globe and Mail
A podcaster who has chronicled the Alberta health care controversy and is being sued for defamation is back in court Friday, after a judge ordered him earlier this month to remove all content related to the case from the internet and to stop publishing any new material.
Justice Doreen Sulyma of the Court of King’s Bench in Edmonton issued the two-week injunction on Feb. 14 against Nate Pike, a paramedic who also runs The Breakdown, a one-man online political commentary outlet started in 2019.
Mr. Pike had for months published extensive material on questions around Alberta Health Services’ contracting and procurement, the United Conservative Party government’s role and the involvement of Sam Mraiche, owner of MHCare Medical, a company that does business with the province.
Mr. Mraiche and MHCare filed a lawsuit against Mr. Pike on Dec. 19 for defamation and harassment.
The Alberta government has faced a growing controversy since The Globe and Mail reported in early February on allegations of contracting and procurement issues within AHS. The Auditor-General has launched an investigation and this week a cabinet minister resigned over his government’s handling of the issue.
The allegations were later made public in a wrongful dismissal lawsuit filed by the former chief executive of AHS.
Athana Mentzelopoulos claims in her suit that she was fired two days before she was to go to the province’s Auditor-General with concerns that government officials interfered in the health authority’s contracting and procurement process on behalf of private companies. The claims have not been tested in court.
In Mr. Pike’s defamation case, Mr. Mraiche on Feb. 13 filed an affidavit that said he was “extremely fearful” for his and his family’s safety. If that is true, then I think the fault likes with Mr. Mraiche and how he conducts himself. He ought to clean up his act and not work to bribe our politician with fancy sky box hockey tickets and who knows what else. The issue was heard on an urgent basis on Feb. 14, when the court ordered Mr. Pike to remove all related material from the internet and to stop making new statements.
Mr. Pike decided to take down all Breakdown publications from the internet, saying he didn’t have enough time to go through all the material.
Mr. Pike’s lawyers say the injunction went too far. The Friday court hearing will consider whether the injunction will be extended, narrowed or allowed to expire. If it expires, The Breakdown could bring its material back online.
“It’s really an extraordinary order,” said his lawyer Shaun Fluker of Wilson Laycraft.
Mr. Pike’s lawyers have also appealed to the Alberta Court of Appeal, set to be heard May 5, where they plan to argue the Feb. 14 order was “exceptionally broad and unsupported by the factual matrix or the legal threshold.”
Mr. Mraiche’s lawyers did not respond to several requests for comment. They have previously said in a statement that “any allegations or insinuations of wrongdoing on the part of MHCare Medical Corporation and/or Sam Mraiche are unwarranted and unjustified.”
Legal experts say the injunction is the latest episode of how Canadian judges weigh allegations of defamation against freedom of expression ahead of a full trial when all arguments and evidence are considered.
Hilary Young, a law professor at the University of New Brunswick, said there is “no justification” for what she called an overly broad order from the Alberta court.
Prof. Young’s 2021 research in the Dalhousie Law Journal showed defamation injunctions regularly go “far beyond what is justifiable.”
Freedom of expression is at risk if allegations that aren’t fully tested in court can lead judges to order material removed from the internet, she said.
“If someone’s controversial words can be shut down because they might harm a reputation, that’s a very powerful weapon for anyone who doesn’t want to be criticized publicly,” Prof. Young said.Notablye genocidal Israel and Zionists enabling that genocide.
At the Feb. 14 court hearing, Justice Sulyma appeared skeptical of Mr. Pike’s work on The Breakdown podcast and social media, according to a court transcript filed as part of a subsequent affidavit from Mr. Pike.
Justice Sulyma said it was “kind of odd” that Mr. Pike had extensively followed “matters of government” and that he is “not entitled to defame people.” She also questioned the “right of a private citizen to broadcast crap.”
Justice Sulyma then ordered the two-week injunction. She said a “true defence” for Mr. Pike’s work had not been established. Further, on what’s called the balance of convenience, she favoured Mr. Mraiche, who the judge said has been “put in a dangerous situation.”Unbelievable judicial industry bullshit, catering to the corrupt in the UCP and the rich. Just fucking wow.
Legal experts say deciding a defamation injunction on the balance of convenience is controversial.
Lori Williams, a political scientist at Mount Royal University in Calgary, said there are significant issues of free expression at play in a case of obvious public importance.Alberta con politicians hate our charter right to freedom of expression and love polluting harmful corporations (many of which are American), which is why they unlawfully legislated the AER above the charter. Unfortunately, Herr Harper (and his puppet Poilievre) hates the charter too, as do the other con provincial politicians. and a lot of judges they plunk on the bench
“All Canadians are entitled to freedom of expression and to engage in what the law calls fair comment on political matters,” Prof. Williams said.
Mr. Pike said in a brief, final podcast on Feb. 16 that he has worked as an advanced care paramedic for about 15 years. He said started The Breakdown with the goal of stoking a better understanding politics and “holding people in positions of power and influence to account.”
NigelBankes @nigelb.bsky.social:
What a disappointing column from @thetyee.ca
No real analysis and no mention of SLAPP suits (strategic law suits against public participation) – which is exactly what this is – but carried to extremes by the application for an interim injunction.
A Close Look at Legal Battle that Stymied Alberta Podcast ‘The Breakdown’, A justice ordered mentions of MHCare and its owner scrubbed. We asked a top media lawyer to analyze her ruling by Charles Rusnell, Feb 27, 2025, The Tyee
One of Canada’s foremost defamation law experts says a sweeping interim injunction granted by an Alberta judge against the Breakdown, a popular web-based political commentary show, “is vulnerable to either being set aside or significantly modified” in a court hearing Friday.
Lawyers for MHCare Medical sought the interim injunction through an emergency hearing on Feb. 14. MHCare is a medical supply company owned by Sam Mraiche, the multimillionaire Edmonton businessman at the nexus of the so-called CorruptCare scandal.
MHCare sued the Breakdown and its owner and host, Calgary paramedic Nate Pike, for $6 million on Dec. 19.
In a series of shows, Pike, who stresses he is not a journalist, commented on government contracts to MHCare and the provision by Mraiche of luxury suite NHL playoff tickets to several UCP cabinet ministers, including Premier Danielle Smith, and to senior political staff.
The allegations have not been proven in court. Pike has filed a statement of defence in which he denies the allegations that he illegally defamed Mraiche or his business.
The two-week interim injunction, issued by Edmonton Court of King’s Bench Justice Doreen Sulyma, directed Pike to remove all content from his various social media platforms that mentions Mraiche, or his company. The court also directed him not to comment publicly about Mraiche or his company in any way.
While Pike’s supporters have alleged the court ordered him to be silenced, in fact it was Pike who opted to shut down all his social media because he said it was impossible to sort out the information subject to the injunction.
The Breakdown, now in its sixth year, has nearly 40,000 YouTube subscribers. Pike has raised nearly $200,000 through a legal defence fund he set up on GoFundMe after MHCare sued him.
Friday’s hearing in Edmonton will be before a different judge. Pike’s lawyers will argue the interim injunction is exceptionally broad and not supported by sufficient facts to meet a legal threshold as defined by a section of the Canadian Charter that guarantees freedom of expression. The judge could allow the interim injunction to lapse, narrow it, or order an extension.
Veteran Vancouver defamation lawyer Roger McConchie said Sulyma’s ruling may not withstand the appeal, but he is not surprised she granted the interim two-week injunction.
The often-acrimonious Feb. 14 hearing might have been confusing for the judge, McConchie said, after reviewing a transcript of the hearing obtained by The Tyee.
Pre-defamation trial injunctions are so rare that the related law is esoteric and complex, even for McConchie, who has specialized in libel and defamation law for more than 30 years.
“The transcript [in this injunction hearing] does not disclose that the leading principles of case law were made clear to the court,” said McConchie, who authored the law textbook Canadian Libel and Slander Actions.
Mraiche sought the emergency hearing because he contended, in an affidavit, that Pike had engaged in an allegedly defamatory and harassing campaign that caused him to fear for the safety of himself and his family.
Blayne Iskiw filed an affidavit in support of the injunction. Iskiw is one of the directors of Alberta Surgical Group or ASG, a chartered surgical facility company, which has done contract orthopedic surgeries for Alberta Health Services or AHS. The Globe and Mail has reported Mraiche is a 25 per cent shareholder in ASG. The interim injunction also applies to Iskiw.
In a wrongful dismissal lawsuit against AHS and Health Minister Adriana LaGrange, ousted AHS CEO Athana Mentzelopoulos alleges that she was politically pressured to sign contracts with chartered surgical facilities, including ASG.
Mentzelopoulos also alleged MHCare received more than $600 million in medical supply contracts.
None of the allegations in the Mentzelopoulos lawsuit, in which Mraiche was mentioned but not named as a defendant, have been tested in court. A statement of defence has yet to be filed.
The transcript shows Pike’s lawyers learned about the injunction application at 9 p.m. on Feb. 13 and they worked through the night to prepare for the hearing the next afternoon. It appears from the transcript that Sulyma, who has decades of experience on the bench, may have not had time to review the submissions.
McConchie noted that Mraiche’s lawyer — Greg Bentz of Edmonton — rightly pointed out that granting an injunction requires crossing a high legal hurdle. But it’s unclear if the elements of that strict test were completely conveyed to the court in the legal submissions.
Under the law, the plaintiffs must demonstrate that it is beyond doubt that any defamation defence raised by the defendant is not sustainable.
In Canadian Libel and Slander Actions, McConchie wrote that, “pretrial injunctions will only be granted in exceptional circumstances, where the words complained of are unarguably defamatory, clearly untrue and clearly not fair comment.
“The Court must conclude that any jury verdict favouring the defendant at trial would inevitably be considered perverse by a court of appeal.”
Pike’s lawyer, Richard Harrison from Calgary, told the judge he had several plausible defences, including fair comment, to some of the allegations.
Sulyma conceded she wasn’t familiar with the defence of fair comment.
She also seemed to have no idea what role Pike served as an online political commentator, or even why he publicly commented.
Harrison told the judge that Pike was interested in how the government procures medical supplies because he is a paramedic employed by AHS.
“I guess that puts him in the arena,” Sulyma said. “But it is kind of odd that an employee of AHS would be interested in matters of government.”WTF! J Sulyma, who favours rapists in her rulings and apparently jailed a rape victim in a cell across from her fucking rapist, looks to me like a fucking idiot. Anyone working anywhere in any career (paid or volunteer) can be interested in matters of gov’t and all of the citizenry ought to be, notably when the Premier lies most of the time, steals from ordinary Albertans and the marginalized to give to her rich pals, and UCP are quislings, praying with and betraying all Canadians to the Nazis south of the border, and is mangled up in endless corrupt activities.
Harrison responded: “He is a private citizen, Justice [Sulyma], who has a Charter right to provide commentary on matters that are in the public interest.”
Harrison’s main argument was that Pike was offering commentary in the public interest on facts established by others, including media outlets, AHS and on his own research. And he repeatedly stated his client had viable defences, as detailed in Pike’s own affidavit.
Sulyma seemed not to accept that argument.
“My point is if you go around slandering and defaming people that that is not in the public interest,” OMG! Does the judeg not realize there has not yet be a trial yet? Discovery hasn’t even happened yet (I bet Pike will get heaps of deliciousness in that, which will benefit the public intererst, and be of great interest to many Albertans). Pike was reporting on and connecting the dots of what other media reported, and his FOIP results which are hugely in the public interest, notably given that it appears $600Million+ of public money is being mishandled by UCP to benefit their rich pals.Sulyma said.
“In the law of defamation, you are permitted to defame someone so long as you have an actionable defence,” Harrison said.
Later, during an exchange about the alleged safety risk to Mraiche, Sulyma reminded Harrison that seeking an interim injunction is “serious stuff” and she had hoped that responsible lawyers could have worked out some concessions before the hearing.
“I can say that perhaps Mr. Pike is not such a nice guy but I cannot rule on this, this afternoon,” the judge said.
In her ruling, she said she had considered the law and recognized its “higher burden” but found “it has not been established that there is a true defence by law or fact and, on a balance of convenience, the fact that real people have been put in dangerous positions.”Holy shit, this is a shit judge, I bet loved by rapists and our corrupt politicians. She ought to have been fired years ago, but I expect the rich and the patriarchy demands she stays on the bench to let rapists go, and shame and blame and revictimize rape victims and attack our charter rights to please her masters.
She issued an interim injunction for two weeks “hoping that the people involved, all parties, could work out their own solution.”
McConchie said the judge’s reference to the “balance of convenience” will likely be one of the major hinge points on whether the appeal succeeds or fails. It has been addressed in a Supreme Court of Canada decision, McConchie said.
In an ordinary civil case, he said, the granting of a pre-trial injunction takes into account the balance of convenience — which of the parties would suffer greater harm from granting or refusal of the injunction pending a decision on the merits.
But the Supreme Court found that factor plays no role in a determination by a court whether “prior restraint” of expression is warranted.
The Tyee asked McConchie to review the statement of claim, which details the defamation allegations, and Pike’s statement of defence.
The statement of claim contains several legally problematic allegations, he said, and the bare bones statement of defence was obviously filed to prevent a default judgment.
He said Pike’s lawyer likely knows his client must file an amended statement of claim that sets out a detailed defence.
“Right now the statement of defence is just labels like truth, fair comment and responsible communications. But labels won’t take you very far.”
If you have any information for this story, or information for another story, please contact Charles Rusnell in confidence via email.
nancyjt:
I sent Nate a bit of money and am pleased that others did too. We need citizen involvement now more than ever. It will be interesting to see what happens at the hearing tomorrow.
At least the didn’t manage to get him fired (yet).
Aye Aye:
Hope it all goes well for Nate. He did nothing wrong. In addition, I hope that nobody outside of the court house influences the outcome in an adverse way. The UCP have to go.Yes, they do, but Bible Belt supremely corrupted rural Albertans, who control the vote thanks to Herr Harper, will never vote any other way than Con/UCP, to be abused by their gov’t, lied to, abused some more, decade after decade, because that fits best with their hatred, bigotry and ignorance, which is why Alberta gets consistent corruption and evil from its con governments.
Refer also to:
