Equality Project
Menu
  • Home
  • About
    • Our Project
    • Our Research Team
    • Our Partners
    • Our Students
    • Our Youth Advisory Committee
    • eQuality Annual Reports
  • Research
    • Research Projects
    • Research Publications
    • Conference Presentations
  • Policy
    • Policy Interventions
    • Policy Publications
  • Resources
    • Youth Summit
      • eQuality Project Youth Summit Documentary
    • Outreach Projects
    • Art Exchange
    • Cashing In: The Invisible Machine
    • CRM 1300 – Cybercrime & Surveillance
    • Disconnection Challenge
    • Connection Challenge
    • Half Girl, Half Face
    • International Day of the Girl
    • Legal Briefs: Tech-Facilitated Violence & the Law
    • Panel on AI & Algorithms
    • Pushback Timeline
    • Tech-Facilitated Violence – Criminal Case Law
    • #tresdancing
    • Transcending Technology – Between Freedom and Surveillance
    • unLine Exhibition
    • UROP & Student Posters
    • You Are What We Make You
    • Youth Speakers List
    • eQuality Lesson Plans
  • Follow Us
    • Twitter
    • eQuality News
    • eQuality Blog
    • Youth Speakers List
×
  • Home
  • About
    • Our Project
    • Our Research Team
    • Our Partners
    • Our Students
    • Our Youth Advisory Committee
    • eQuality Annual Reports
  • Research
    • Research Projects
    • Research Publications
    • Conference Presentations
  • Policy
    • Policy Interventions
    • Policy Publications
  • Resources
    • Youth Summit
      • eQuality Project Youth Summit Documentary
    • Outreach Projects
    • Art Exchange
    • Cashing In: The Invisible Machine
    • CRM 1300 – Cybercrime & Surveillance
    • Disconnection Challenge
    • Connection Challenge
    • Half Girl, Half Face
    • International Day of the Girl
    • Legal Briefs: Tech-Facilitated Violence & the Law
    • Panel on AI & Algorithms
    • Pushback Timeline
    • Tech-Facilitated Violence – Criminal Case Law
    • #tresdancing
    • Transcending Technology – Between Freedom and Surveillance
    • unLine Exhibition
    • UROP & Student Posters
    • You Are What We Make You
    • Youth Speakers List
    • eQuality Lesson Plans
  • Follow Us
    • Twitter
    • eQuality News
    • eQuality Blog
    • Youth Speakers List
×

Tech-Facilitated Violence – Criminal Case Law – Non-Consensual Sharing of Intimate Images

Home / Resources / Tech-Facilitated Violence – Criminal Case Law / Tech-Facilitated Violence: Criminal Case Law – Criminal Offences / Tech-Facilitated Violence – Criminal Case Law – Non-Consensual Sharing of Intimate Images

OFFENCE ELEMENTS - NON-CONSENSUAL DISTRIBUTION OF INTIMATE IMAGES

s 162.1 (1) Everyone who knowingly publishes, distributes, transmits, sells, makes available or advertises an intimate image of a person knowing that the person depicted in the image did not give their consent to that conduct, or being reckless as to whether or not that person gave their consent to that conduct, is guilty

(a) of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years; or
(b) of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Definition of intimate image

(2) In this section, intimate image means a visual recording of a person made by any means including a photographic, film or video recording,

(a) in which the person is nude, is exposing his or her genital organs or anal region or her breasts or is engaged in explicit sexual activity;
(b) in respect of which, at the time of the recording, there were circumstances that gave rise to a reasonable expectation of privacy; and
(c) in respect of which the person depicted retains a reasonable expectation of privacy at the time the offence is committed.

OFFENCE ELEMENTS - NON-CONSENSUAL DISTRIBUTION OF INTIMATE IMAGES

Defence

(3) No person shall be convicted of an offence under this section if the conduct that forms the subject-matter of the charge serves the public good and does not extend beyond what serves the public good.

Question of fact and law, motives

(4) For the purposes of subsection (3),

(a) it is a question of law whether the conduct serves the public good and whether there is evidence that the conduct alleged goes beyond what serves the public good, but it is a question of fact whether the conduct does or does not extend beyond what serves the public good; and
(b) the motives of an accused are irrelevant.

SELECTED CASE LAW

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

BRITISH COLUMBIA:
2016 BCPC 400

MANITOBA:
2018 MBCA 48

NEWFOUNDLAND & LABRADOR:
2018 CanLII 25580 (NLPC)
[2017] NJ No 1 (NLPC)

NOVA SCOTIA:
2017 NSPC 12 (Youth Court)

ONTARIO:
2018 ONSC 4726
2018 ONSC 2422
2018 ONSC 2299
2018 ONCJ 82
2017 ONCJ 943
2017 ONSC 3425
2017 ONCJ 317
2017 ONCJ 415
2017 ONCJ 129
[2016] OJ No 7080 (ONCJ) 23
[2016] OJ No 7196 (ONCJ) 24
2016 ONSC 6585

QUEBEC:
2016 QCCQ 6167

Contact

The eQuality Project
University of Ottawa, Brooks 410,
100 Thomas More Private
Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5
CANADA

E-Mail: info@equalityproject.ca
Website: equalityproject.ca
Twitter: @eQuality_ca

About

The eQuality Project is funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

SSHRC Logo

Icons made by Elegant Themes from www.flaticon.com are licensed as CC BY 3.0

Powered By Accesspress Themes