From: Neil Foster <Neil.Foster@newcastle.edu.au>
To: Hilary Young <hilaryanyoung@yahoo.ca>
CC: Wright, Richard <rwright@kentlaw.iit.edu>
Vaughan Black <Vaughan.Black@dal.ca>
obligations@uwo.ca
Date: 28/08/2013 05:34:25 UTC
Subject: Re: A Nova Scotia statute

If I can foolishly venture to comment on Canadian law- I had occasion recently to analyse the SCC decision in Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v Whatcott, 2013 SCC 11 (27 Feb 2013) in another context and, while I don't agree with every aspect of the decision, at least the Court was clear that a law which prohibited mere hurt feelings was invalid as contrary to the Canadian Charter s2(b)- see para [92]. So I suspect this legislation is probably also at least in that respect invalid.
Regards
Neil

On 28/08/2013, at 6:03 AM, Hilary Young <hilaryanyoung@yahoo.ca> wrote:

If memory serves, a further provision requires parents to disprove that they were not adequately supervising their minor cyberbullying children and imposes joint and several liability on them as a result.

--Hilary Young



From: "Wright, Richard" <rwright@kentlaw.iit.edu>
To: Vaughan Black <Vaughan.Black@dal.ca>
Cc: obligations@uwo.ca
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 4:56:56 PM
Subject: Re: A Nova Scotia statute

Wow!  Apparently any humiliation or distress will do, no matter how slight, or justified.  Is there an equivalent to the First Amendment to the US Constitution in Canada and/or Nova Scotia?  No more reviews of others' work which might be taken as critical and upsetting . . . .
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Vaughan Black <Vaughan.Black@dal.ca> wrote:
Members of the group may be interested in a Nova Scotia statute that came into force earlier this month.  The Cyber-safety Act, SNS 2013, c 2 is a hastily drafted over-reaction to a a teenage suicide.  It provides the following definition of something called cyberbullying.


"cyberbullying" means any electronic communication through the use of technology including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, computers, other electronic devices, social networks, text messaging, instant messaging, websites and electronic mail, typically repeated or with continuing effect, that is intended or ought reasonably be expected to cause fear, intimidation, humiliation, distress or other damage or harm to another person's health, emotional well-being, self-esteem or reputation, and includes assisting or encouraging such communication in any way. . . .


A number of things follow from this definition but the one that will most interest members of this group is s. 21:  "A person who subjects another person to cyberbullying commits a tort against that person."

So take care that none of your responses tends to harm my self-esteem.  If it does then it would seem that, subject to choice-of-law considerations, I can sue you.  And the act provides for punitives!

Regards,
vb





--
Richard W. Wright
University Distinguished Professor and Professor of Law
Illinois Institute of Technology Chicago-Kent College of Law