WhatsOrb - Forest Products lawsuit against #Greenpeace.
Close Login
Register here
Forgot password
Forgot password
or
or

Close
Close Inspiration on environmental sustainability, every month.

Currently 5,988 people are getting new inspiration every month from our global sustainability exchange. Do you want to stay informed? Fill in your e-mail address below:

Close Receive monthly UPDATES ON ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY IN YOUR MAILBOX EVERY MONTH.

Want to be kept in the loop? We will provide monthly overview of what is happening in our community along with new exciting ways on how you can contribute.

your profile is 33% complete:
33%
Update profile Close

Activism Activism Litigation

Forest Products lawsuit against #Greenpeace.

Share this post
by: Hans van der Broek
Forest Products lawsuit against #Greenpeace.

TORONTO — A decision to cut down swaths of a Canadian forestry company’s claims against Greenpeace has survived an attempted legal challenge before Ontario’s top court.

That means a $7 million lawsuit by Resolute Forest Products against the environmental group will now proceed on a narrower but still substantive tract.

In the latest development in the bitter legal fight, the Ontario Court of Appeal declined to hear Resolute’s challenge of a Divisional Court ruling from last August that found several of the company’s allegations to be frivolous.

Greenpeace called the failed appeal attempt a “major setback” for Resolute.

Greenpeace admits its attacks on forest products giant were ‘non-verifiable statements of subjective opinion’
Kevin Libin: Environmentalists admit you shouldn’t believe what they say — but they want your money anyway
“Resolute can try to muzzle their watchdogs by filing lawsuits as part of an expensive PR campaign, but they will ultimately fail,” Shane Moffatt, with Greenpeace Canada, said in a statement Friday. “Greenpeace will continue to stand by our critique of Resolute’s forestry practices as sound opinion based on reliable scientific evidence.”

Resolute, one of the world’s largest forestry multinationals, sued Greenpeace Canada and two staff members in 2013 over the group’s campaign against the company’s boreal logging in northern Ontario and Quebec. Essentially, Resolute alleges Greenpeace defamed it and interfered with its economic relations by threatening its customers.

The now affirmed decision that narrows the scope of the lawsuit does not change the basis of its case, Resolute said Friday.

“We have a moral and ethical responsibility to hold them accountable for their irresponsible and illegal campaign of misinformation,” Resolute’s Seth Kursman said. “They have not only caused economic harm to Resolute but also have directly impacted our customers, employees, First Nations partners, unions, small business owners and countless other in the communities in which we operate.”

In its August ruling, the Divisional Court struck down several branches of Resolute’s claim. Among other things, the company wanted to assert that Greenpeace organizations around the world had for decades systematically defied the law and acted illegitimately. It also wanted to claim that Greenpeace spent more on fundraising in 2012 than on any one of its campaigns.

“These allegations have nothing to do with the allegations of defamation and threatening Resolute customers in respect to Resolute’s conduct in Canada’s boreal forests,” the Divisional Court said in its ruling.

Despite the setback, Resolute said it wanted now to get on quickly with pressing its claim against Greenpeace, which it accused of drifting away from legitimate environmental work.

Meanwhile, a decision is pending on the fate of a related $300-million lawsuit Resolute filed in the United States against Greenpeace based on laws aimed at combating organized crime. The suit alleges the eco-group has indulged in a “criminal scheme” against Resolute.

Greenpeace is trying to have the suit thrown out without a substantive hearing on its merits by arguing among other things that its allegations against Resolute are constitutionally protected free speech even if not literally true.

“We are confident that the courts will continue to dismiss this company’s inflammatory allegations,” Moffatt said.

The Canadian Press

Updates on environmental sustainability, every month in your mailbox!
sign up
More by: Hans van der Broek
Messange
You
Share this post
Hans van der Broek , founder Founder and CEO of WhatsOrb, world traveller, entrepreneur and environmental activist. Hans has countless ideas and has set up several businesses in the Netherlands and abroad. He also has an opinion on everything and unlimited thoughts about how to create a better world. He likes hiking and has climbed numerous five-thousanders (mountain summits of at least 5000m or 16,404 feet in elevation)  
Hans van der Broek , founder Founder and CEO of WhatsOrb, world traveller, entrepreneur and environmental activist. Hans has countless ideas and has set up several businesses in the Netherlands and abroad. He also has an opinion on everything and unlimited thoughts about how to create a better world. He likes hiking and has climbed numerous five-thousanders (mountain summits of at least 5000m or 16,404 feet in elevation)  
signup
Updates on environmental sustainability, every month in your mailbox!
sign up
More by: Hans van der Broek
Get updates on environmental sustainability in your mailbox every month.

Whatsorb

Whatsorb info

whatsorb whatsorb whatsorb whatsorb@example.com