York University is taking legal action against Toronto Life over a recent article about sexual assaults at the school.
The story, which appears in the October issue of the magazine, is titled “Fortress York” and examines a string of on-campus attacks that the author purports have made the school infamous for sex assaults. It depicts female York students as living in constant fear, and suggests the campus has become “a hunting ground for sexual predators.”
The tagline on the issue’s cover reads “Why there are so many rapes at York U.”
Joanne Rider, a spokesperson for the university, confirmed that on Tuesday the school served Toronto Life Publishing Ltd. and the story’s author, award-winning freelancer Katherine Laidlaw, with a notice of libel as a result of the piece.
Rider would not comment on the details of the notice, but the administration, the York Federation of Students, and some faculty members have all publicly condemned the story.
In a statement posted to the school’s news service on September 17, York President and Vice-Chancellor Mamdouh Shoukri said the article “presents a wholly distorted picture of women’s safety on the campus of York University.” Shoukri denied as “patently false” the claim that York has seen a disproportionately high number of rapes.
“The article employs one out-of-context statistic to make sweeping and misleading generalizations that foster an atmosphere of fear in the York community and beyond, and cause undue reputational and other damages to the University,” he said.
On Wednesday the York Federation of Students also released a statement, arguing that the article was based on “misleading and troubling generalizations” and that sexual violence is “not unique or more prevalent at York in particular.”
A statement written by three faculty members who identified themselves as “feminist scholars” called the story a “caricature of reality” that “sensationaliz[es] and misrepresent[s] sexual violence, sexual assault, and rape on the York University.” The statement was co-signed by 16 other faculty members.
Both Laidlaw and Sarah Fulford, the editor of Toronto Life, declined a request for comment for this story.
According to Toronto-based defamation lawyer Michael Smith, a notice of libel is a preliminary step and a precondition of being able to sue for libel. Once the notice is served, the alleged victim has three months to sue. In the meantime, the notice gives a publication an opportunity to retract, apologize, clarify, or amend the allegedly defamatory statements.
“If I’m acting for a defendant who gets a libel notice, we look at the publication and see if there’s potentially any problems there, and even in cases where we might feel confident there’s no actionable defamation… we might still nevertheless negotiate with the people who are complaining to arrive at some sort of compromise,” says Smith, a partner at Borden Ladner Gervais. “Typical ways to address the libel notice are to negotiate the words of an apology, or retraction, or both.”
Under Canadian law it is relatively easy to establish the basis for a libel case, Smith says. The alleged victim has to prove three elements: that a statement was published that it referenced the alleged victim and that it damaged their reputation.
“The victim of defamation doesn’t have to prove, at least initially, that the statement is false,” he says.
If a case goes to court, the onus is on the alleged defamer to prove that the statement was true. Other possible defences are responsible journalism, qualified privilege (that it was in the public interest to communicate the allegedly libelous statement), and fair comment (that the statement addressed a matter of public interest, and described a reasonable opinion based on knowable facts).
