Article contentThe Supreme Court of Nova Scotia has ruled that a publication cyberbullied members of a family by publishing photos — including one of a respondent’s breasts — to go with articles about them but at the same time said the stories themselves were not at issue.THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY.Subscribe now to access this story and more:Unlimited access to the website and appExclusive access to premium content, newsletters and podcastsFull access to the e-Edition app, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment onEnjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalistsSupport local journalists and the next generation of journalistsSUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES.Subscribe or sign in to your account to continue your reading experience.Unlimited access to the website and appExclusive access to premium content, newsletters and podcastsFull access to the e-Edition app, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment onEnjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalistsSupport local journalists and the next generation of journalistsRegister to unlock more articles.Create an account or sign in to continue your reading experience.Access additional stories every monthShare your thoughts and join the conversation in our commenting communityGet email updates from your favourite authorsSign In or Create an AccountorArticle contentFrank magazine published two stories in July 2025, written by managing editor Andrew Douglas, about Danny and Melissa Mizrachi of Halifax.Article contentArticle contentArticle contentThe court granted an interim order on July 21, 2025, requiring that the stories be taken down from Frank’s online platforms while the matter was dealt with.Article contentThe two articles dealt with the Mizrachis’ property rentals and their conduct as landlords.Article contentOne article included a photograph of Melissa Mizrachi sitting on a sofa with her breasts exposed. Douglas digitally placed a small black bar across the nipples, the decision from Justice Ann Smith said.Article contentThe decisionArticle content“The need to protect Nova Scotians from the harms caused by non-consensual sharing of intimate images and cyberbullying must be considered in the context of the right of journalists to freedom of the press,” Smith wrote.Article contentAccording to the decision, released Wednesday, the Mizrachis alleged, among other things, that both articles contained information that was false, that they portrayed Melissa as a prostitute and drug user, and that they engaged in behaviour such as extortion and manipulation of the immigration system related to Danny Mizrachi obtaining Canadian citizenship. They also said the articles portrayed them as crooks, thieves and slum landlords.Article contentArticle contentMelissa Mizrachi alleged that the picture of her topless on the couch was an intimate image under the Intimate Images and Cyber-protection Act and was published without her consent.Article contentThe Mizrachis also said Frank published her cellphone number, their civic address, the licence plate number of their vehicle and a picture of Melissa Mizrachi with their son when he was a child.Article contentFrank magazine and Douglas said the stories were published in the public interest and addressed tenants’ rights, affordable housing, housing for international students and the conduct of landlords renting to low-income tenants.Article contentThey also said the stories contained statements of fact, the statements were true and, to the extent the stories were composed of mixed fact and opinion, opinions were fair comments a reasonably informed person could hold.Article contentThey said the stories were researched and written in a manner consistent with the principles of responsible journalism and responsible communication on issues in the public interest.
Frank magazine ruling: Publishing intimate photos was cyberbullying, but article on Nova Scotia landlords wasn’t
