Burjoski v. Waterloo Region District School Board et al.

Intervening to protect those who publicly defend 2SLGBTQI people from defamation lawsuits

---

Case Background

In January of 2022, a former teacher at the Waterloo Region District School Board (WRDSB), Carolyn Burjoski, gave a presentation at a school board meeting. The presentation was supposed to be about transparency in the process through which books are added and removed from school libraries. 

During her presentation, Burjoski singled out two books, one about a trans child and one about asexuality, as being inappropriate for children. She went on to say that some library books about trans youth make it “seem simple or even cool to take puberty blockers or opposite sex hormones”. Burjoski went on to describe books about gender identity as misleading and to say that the book about a trans child makes “very serious medical interventions seem like an easy cure for emotional and social distress”. 

After providing warnings, the Chair of the Board ended Burjoski’s presentation on the grounds that her comments violated human rights legislation. 

Over the following days, he told media that Burjoski’s comments were “transphobic,” “violated WRDSB policy and the Human Rights Code”, that she had spoken in a way that was “disrespectful” and “would cause transgendered [sic] people to be attacked”, and that Burjoski’s comments constituted hate. 

Based on those comments, Burjoski sued the then-Chair of the Board (who is no longer in that role) as well as the WRDSB itself for defamation. The former Chair and the WRDSB responded by applying to have the lawsuit dismissed on the basis of Ontario’s “anti-SLAPP” law.  A SLAPP is a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation — a lawsuit where one party sues the other to prevent or discourage them from, among other things, adding their voice to a public conversation. 

The Superior Court of Ontario decided that the litigation was not a SLAPP and that the case should proceed. The decision contains some very troubling language, including referring to trans identity as “transgenderism” – a deeply pathologizing term used by anti-trans groups – and a reference to “the LGBTQ lifestyle”, a term known to carry negative connotations and to imply that being 2SLGBTQI is a choice. The WRDSB and the former Chair appealed the Superior Court decision to the Ontario Court of Appeal, where Egale intervened.

Our Legal Arguments at the Court of Appeal

Egale Canada was accepted as an intervener in the case to provide the court with background on the vulnerability of trans people in Canada and the harm caused by speech that undermines their existence. Our main submissions were: 

1. Speech that characterizes trans identities and gender nonconformity as trends, mental illness, or confusion is discriminatory, as has been recognized by the Supreme Court of Canada in Hansman v. Neufeld. This kind of speech is often used to deny individual trans people, especially youth, as well as trans communities access to important resources. When people challenge this kind of speech and point out its inherently hateful nature, it is in the public interest.
2. It is important that courts use thoughtful and intentional language when describing marginalized groups.  

Case Outcome

November 5, 2024 – The Waterloo Region District School Board and the former Chair’s appeal of the Superior Court decision to the Ontario Court of Appeal, has been dismissed. This means that Carolyn Burjoski’s defamation claim can proceed.

The Court of Appeal’s decision referred to Egale’s submission and the importance of courts using appropriate language when discussing 2SLGBTQI persons, stating that “words matter” and that “[p]roper terminology signals respect for the dignity and equality of an individual or group”. The Court of Appeal therefore encouraged “all participants in the justice system to take the necessary care when engaging with language that purports to define individual identity.”

---

Supporting Documents

---