On August 19, 2025, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (the Court) released its decision in Canadian Aids Treatment Information Exchange (CATIE) et al. v. Blackwell, granting one of the largest awards in a defamation lawsuit in Canadian history.
Court decision and rationale
The Court awarded the plaintiffs CA$1.25M in general damages, CA$250,000 in aggravated damages and CA$250,000 in punitive damages with additional costs bringing the total close to CA$2 million. Issued by default after the defendant failed to respond to the lawsuit, the ruling demonstrates that courts may impose serious financial consequences for online attacks that cause reputational harm and threaten public interest work.
CATIE is a national non-profit that provides treatment and prevention information on blood-borne and sexually transmitted infections for marginalized populations, including members of the 2SLGBTQIA+ community and other at-risk groups.
The Court found that the defendant ran a malicious and hate-fuelled online campaign, where he repeatedly accused CATIE, its staff and volunteers of sexually grooming children. He posted their personal information online and on social media, tying the defamatory statements back to CATIE’s public health and harm reduction work. In addition to the large monetary awards, the Court issued a permanent injunction, forcing the removal of existing posts and restricting any further defamatory statements.
Several compelling factors justified the extraordinary size of the awards and distinguished this case from those before it:
- Online reach and permanence: The Court described the internet as an “amplifier” where defamation spreads rapidly, is difficult to contain and is never truly erased.
- Severity of defamatory statements: The defendant referred to CATIE, its staff and volunteers as “creeps,” “groomers,” “pedophiles” and “predators.” The Court noted that the statements not only suggested criminal conduct, but also reinforced harmful stereotypes historically used to marginalize the 2SLGBTQIA+ community:
[34] The defendant perpetuated a baseless and deeply damaging stereotype linking members of the 2SLGBTQIA+ community to pedophilia—a false association that has long been used to marginalize, criminalize, and dehumanize gay people. This baseless stereotype has historically rationalized discrimination, and incited acts of hatred, harassment, and even physical violence. Use of the term “groomer” in this context was plainly homophobic.
- Threat to CATIE’s public interest work: In addition to personally attacking CATIE’s staff and volunteers, the Court found that the defendant’s defamatory campaign threatened CATIE’s mission and ability to deliver critical public health services.
- Need for deterrence: The Court took a strong stance to deter reckless conduct and signal that malicious online attacks are unacceptable.
Key takeaways
CATIE v. Blackwell reflects the modern reality of the internet, which makes reputational harm immediate, far-reaching and more permanent than traditional forms of defamation. Dentons’ experienced team of litigators continues to monitor developments in media and defamation law, recognizing the evolving challenges of the digital world.
For more information or to discuss how our team can support you, please reach out to the author Morgan Camley, KC. Thank you to articling student Mariam Zaidi for her contributions to this article.
