Dear Students and SSMU Members,
We would like to provide an update regarding the status of several legal affairs in which the SSMU was involved this year. The first three cases are concluded, and case four is ongoing at the time of this update.
- Fried v. SSMU (2022):
- First Injunction Against the Lower Field Encampment (2024):
- Second Injunction Against the Lower Field Encampment (2024):
- X v. SSMU (2023) – The Injunction Opposing the Policy Against Genocide in Palestine:
CONCLUDED CASES
1) Fried v. Students’ Society of McGill University (2022)
On April 22, 2024, the Québec Superior Court dismissed the case Fried v. SSMU. This case centred around the Palestine Solidarity Policy, which passed in the Winter 2022 SSMU referendum. The Court dismissed the case as the policy was never ratified by the Board of Directors.
- Read the full judgement here.
2) Medvedovsky et al. v. Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights et al. (2024)
On May 1, 2024, a provisional injunction seeking to remove the self-described Palestinian Solidarity Encampment from McGill’s lower field was dismissed. The Court found that the two plaintiffs failed to substantiate urgency and experiences of discrimination. The Court also noted the case’s abusive potential regarding political discussion of the Palestinian cause if the injunction were to be granted.
Though not a defendant, the SSMU appeared alongside the Association of McGill Professors of Law (AMPL) as an interested party, upholding the SSMU’s commitment to our members’ right to peaceful protest.
- Read the full judgement on the provisional injunction here.
3) McGill et al. v. AMPL, SSMU, PAJU, IJV et al. (2024)
On May 10, 2024, McGill University filed an application originating for the issuance of provisional1, interlocutory, and permanent injunction orders against the self-described Palestinian Solidarity Encampment. The provisional injunction was denied on May 15, 2024.
McGill’s case was opposed by lawyers representing the SSMU, the Association of McGill Professors of Law (AMPL), Palestiniens et Juifs Unis (PAJU), and Independent Jewish Voices (IJV). In the ruling, the Court noted the contextual importance of student protest and McGill’s inability to prove urgency for provisional injunctive relief.
Following the Court’s rejection of the provisional injunction, McGill proceeded with their request for interlocutory and permanent injunction orders.
- Read the full judgement on the provisional injunction here.
Originally, the SSMU was prepared to attend a hearing on July 25, 2024, to fix a trial date for the interlocutory injunction; however, following the dismantlement of the encampment on July 10, 2024, McGill elected to withdraw their subsequent injunction application on July 24, 2024.
- Read McGill’s motion to desist from the case here.
ONGOING CASE
4) X. v. SSMU (2023-2024):
On November 17, 2023, an anonymous plaintiff, X, filed an application for an interlocutory and provisional injunction to prevent the ratification or implementation of the Policy Against Genocide in Palestine. The 2023-2024 SSMU Executive Committee’s initial statement regarding the interlocutory injunction can be read here.
On May 22, 2024, the Superior Court issued an interlocutory injunction ordering the officers, directors, and employees of the SSMU from ratifying or implementing the Policy Against Genocide in Palestine until the trial concludes.
- Read the Superior Court’s judgement on the interlocutory injunction here.
The SSMU elected to appeal the Superior Court’s decision, and was granted leave to appeal on June 21, 2024 by the Court of Appeal of Québec. As of the writing of this statement, the court date for the appeal is still being negotiated between the SSMU and the plaintiff’s lawyers.
- Read the Court of Appeal’s judgement regarding the SSMU’s appeal of the Superior Court ruling here.
Please reach out if you have any questions.
Solidairement,
The SSMU Board of Directors
