In Hamer v. Jane Doe (Ont CA, 2024) the Ontario Court of Appeal allowed an appeal from a successful SLAPP CJA s.137.1 motion.
Here the court considers what evidence is admissible on motions:
[72] Hearsay evidence on a motion is only admissible where the source of it is known and it is on uncontentious matters: rr. 39.01(4) and (5) of the Rules of Civil Procedure. Only the appellants and the respondents filed affidavit evidence on the motion. Specifically, none of the evidence of the individuals to which the respondents refer in their respective affidavits nor, importantly, Ms. Melo’s evidence, was before the court other than by way of hearsay. Moreover, the hearsay evidence was highly contentious. And, given that Ms. Melo’s identity was unknown, the source for the information contained in her posts was also untraceable and unknowable. As a result, the motion judge erred in relying on the respondents’ evidence that depended on hearsay.
The author has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this Isthatlegal.ca webpage.
