A link will in most cases lead to a free, publicly-accessible website.
In a few instances, the link is not to another website but to an Adobe Acrobat version of the judgment stored on this website. Most are from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice which does not display its decisions on its website.
The British Columbia Court of Appeal, in the context of a privacy claim, ordered a stay of proceedings by a British Columbia resident against the defendant Facebook, Inc. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed a defence motion to stay six related libel actions brought by the plaintiff Conrad Black holding that there was a real and substantial connection with Ontario and that the province was a convenient and appropriate forum.
The Court held, however, that the appropriate forum to litigate the defamation claim was in the Superior Court of Alberta or in the Federal Court of Canada. The fact the words complained of were also published in an electronic medium could not be used to defeat this right.
The Court also rejected defence arguments that the plaintiff's lawsuit in Ontario constituted " The Quebec Superior Court, District of Quebec, dismissed an application by the defence for a change of venue in a defamation action which related in part to an email sent by the defendant to a customer of the plaintiffs in Quebec (City) and the publication of a legal notice. Even if an Ontario libel judgment favouring Black might be unenforceable in the United States, it would still have significant value to Black as a vindication of his Ontario reputation.
The District of Quebec was the appropriate venue, because that is where the damages to the plaintiffs' commercial reputation would have occurred. 32-42; presently under reserve in the Supreme Court of Canada:  S. The Quebec Court (Civil Division – Small Claims), District of Montreal, dismissed an application by the defendant to transfer these defamation proceedings to the District of Joliette.
Even if a Canadian court has jurisdiction, it may decline to hear the case if it concludes that the court of some other jurisdiction is more convenient and appropriate for the pursuit of the action and for securing the ends of justice. The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from 2015 ONSC 1128 and held that an internet libel action based on a newspaper article uploaded in Israel to the defendant newspaper's Hebrew and English-language websites can and should proceed in Ontario. The Supreme Court of Canada granted leave to the defendants to appeal a decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal which sustained a lower court decision holding (i) that there is a real and substantial connection between Ontario and the defamation claims brought by the plaintiff Banro Corporation and (ii) that Ontario is the appropriate forum to hear the claims.
See Mc Conchie and Potts, Canadian Libel and Slander Actions, " British Columbia In British Columbia, issues of jurisdiction are now governed by the Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act, S. The appellate court noted that the motion judge in the court below found that the article came to the attention of many of the people in the plaintiff's Toronto office and that it is likely that 200-300 people read the article online. The plaintiff Banro is an Ontario company based in Toronto.Cases published to April 5, 2017This is a list of Canadian court decisions involving the publication of allegedly defamation expression via the Internet.