Kulvinder Gill is back in public, asking for money.
She has only days left to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in Court fees. Here’s some background. This stemmed from a $12.75 million defamation case that she and Ashvinder Lamba filed in December 2020. They sued 23 individuals and media outlets, primarily over comments on Twitter. There are 4 rulings that have come down
(a) Dismissal in February 2022
(b) Costs awarded in October 2022
(c) Motion for security for costs denied November 2023
(d) Appeal dismissed in February 2024
Gill v. Maciver, 2022 ONSC 1279 – Case dismissed under anti-SLAPP laws
Gill v. Maciver, 2022 ONSC 6169 – Over $1 million in costs awarded
Gill v. Maciver, 2023 ONCA 776 – Security for costs from The Pointer Group
Gill v. Maciver, 2024 ONCA 126 – Appeal dismissed
Unsurprisingly, this libel-chill lawsuit backfired bigtime. Gill now owes nearly $300,000 by the end of March, not including lawyers’ fees and other private settlements. Perhaps she should finally admit this was a bad idea.
It’s also scary to think what would have happened if she had won. Would she start suing more people who have annoyed her online? Fortunately for society, she lost.
A few days ago, Jay Bhattacharya posted an interview with Gill about her looming financial problems. For reference, Bhattacharya wrote the Great Barrington Declaration, which can be viewed as “diet lockdowns”. Gill has imminent Court orders to pay, and she doesn’t have the money.
Would it be so difficult to admit she shouldn’t have filed this lawsuit in the first place? That bit of self-reflection would have gone a long way.
Watching the interview, it becomes clear that Gill still doesn’t understand why sued at all.
She talks about wanting to bring her truth forward, but that’s not the purpose of a defamation lawsuit. It’s about whether a Court can silence someone on speech or expression they’ve made publicly. She’s been dealing with these people for nearly 4 years now, and still doesn’t get it.
Gill also talks about anti-SLAPP Motions as if this were a surprise to her. These laws have been on the books in Ontario since 2015, and were well known. In reality, any competent lawyer would discuss such a possibility right away. Not only that, Ontario law typically provides full indemnity (100% of costs) to Defendants who are successful in getting their cases dismissed.
Gill talks about “fair comment” as if it this were some oddity. This defence — one of mixed fact and opinion — is routinely used by Defendants. A statement doesn’t have to be completely accurate as long as there’s some factual basis for it, and a person could honestly hold such a belief.
Gill appears to have gotten incompetent advice, both from former and current counsel.
Noticeably absent is any mention that Gill regrets the damage she inflicted on others. She attempted to bankrupt people over mean words on Twitter. Yes, she had to deal with the CPSO, but she sued people over Twitter remarks. It’s amazing how tone deaf she remains.
Gill tries to justify suing all those people on the grounds that they were “big and powerful”, and that they were “covered by insurance”. Not all of them were, and some had to personally pay out of their savings. A few were seniors living off of a pension. In any event, it comes off as a pretty cold blooded excuse.
Additionally, there are several major omissions in this interview. These are things that Gill should have disclosed if she’s asking for money. They aren’t minor by any means, but could easily cause potential donors to walk away.
- Ted Kuntz claims Vaccine Choice Canada funded Gill’s case
- Appeal lodged to “leverage” settlements with Defendants
- Gill suing former lawyer for $1,850,000 for malpractice
- Gill suing former lawyer for $6,000 in Brampton
- Ashvinder Lamba suing former counsel for $600,000 for malpractice
- Gill has open $7,000,000 defamation suit with Amir Attaran
- Gill sued people who had apologized to her publicly
Granted there are most likely people who would still donate to her defence, but a lot would see this as grounds to refuse.
1. Ted Kuntz claims Vaccine Choice Canada funded Gill’s case
Ted Kuntz of Vaccine Choice Canada gave an Affidavit in the Spring of 2023. See highlighted version. This was in support of a $1.1 million defamation lawsuit against CSASPP. It didn’t go so well. A similar one was filed in the lawsuit against this website.
What’s interesting in the Kuntz Affidavit is paragraph 20. Kuntz says that in the Summer of 2021, the Vaccine Choice membership became concerned about the total lack of activity in their anti-lockdown case. In response, there was an update sent, which is attached as “Exhibit C”.
“Exhibit C” talks about a need to protect doctors, nurses, teachers, etc…. and for them to be able to speak the truth. It explicitly states that “other legal actions had been filed”.
Item #4 in that list talks about a defamation lawsuit that was underway over doctors who had been maligned on social media. Although it doesn’t explicitly name Kulvinder Gill and Ashvinder Lamba, who else could it be? VCC has never identified any other people that may have been used like this.
“Exhibit C” in the Kuntz Affidavit makes it appear that these other lawsuits — such as the Gill/Lamba case in question — were directly financed by them. At a bare minimum, one can imply that the defamation suit was coordinated to help their overall purpose. From the ruling:
[317] Given the position taken on behalf of the Plaintiffs by their counsel in response to the suggestion made by some of the Defendants that the Plaintiffs’ claims were being maintained with the possible benefit of third party funding, I did not consider it necessary or appropriate to refer to it in the above reasons as it did not form any part of the applicable analysis. However, I should indicate to the parties that approach taken in that regard is without prejudice to the entitlement of any party to refer to such issue if there is a proper basis for doing so when making submissions on costs.
In fact, at the end of the February 2022 ruling, it’s stated that the Defendants have been questioning whether Gill’s and Lamba’s suit was financed by outside money.
Kuntz’s Affidavit sure makes it look like Gill and Lamba were getting money for their case from third parties, or at least that it was coordinated by others.
Too bad Gill doesn’t mention that in her recent e-begging.
2. Appeal lodged to “leverage” settlements with Defendants
An important detail that gets glossed over is the reason the case was appealed in the first place. Gill and Lamba (mostly Gill though) were hit with over $1 million in costs that the Defendants’ lawyers had rung up. By appealing, and thus keeping the case open, Gill was able to “leverage” settlements out of people who just wanted it over with. This comes across as bad faith.
In their Appellate Motion for security for costs, The Pointer Group alleges exactly that. Their Motion was denied, however. Their Factum is still well worth a read.
3. Gill suing former lawyer for $1,850,000 for malpractice
Gill filed a Notice of Action against her former lawyer, and his firm. The reason is that the 2 year anniversary of Justice Stewart’s ruling was approaching, and this bought her time. She’s suing him (and his law firm) for $1.85 million. The Notice alleges professional malpractice.
Granted, it could be a year or 2 before she sees any money from this. However, since she’s asking for donations on GiveSendGo, shouldn’t this be mentioned? If the insurance company settles — which is highly probable — she’s in for a windfall of cash.
This came hot on the heels of her former co-Plaintiff filing a lawsuit, and likely was the motivating factor.
4. Gill suing former lawyer for $6,000 in Brampton
Kulvinder Gill actually has two (2) separate lawsuits against former counsel. The Samantha Coomara listed is a junior lawyer, licensed since 2018. It’s for a relatively minor amount, less than $6,000. This is likely what Gill and Lamba had paid out of pocket.
However, this is probably nowhere near the amount of fees their lawyer charged. Since their December 2020 case was so poor, there was never any prospect of collecting anything on contingency. It seems doubtful that he would do anything for free. So, who paid for the case?
If the Kuntz Affidavit is to be taken seriously, Vaccine Choice Canada’s donors paid.
5. Ashvinder Lamba suing former counsel for $600,000 for malpractice
Recently, Ashvinder Lamba, Gill’s former co-Plaintiff, filed a $600,000 professional malpractice lawsuit against their former lawyer. This is likely what gave Gill the idea to file her own (larger) suit. Insurance companies will likely pay out rather than take on a longer, more expensive Trial.
As of the time of writing this, a Notice of Intent to Defend has been filed. This is not the same thing as a Statement of Defence, but still indicates that the case will be fought.
Lamba complains about “junior staff” being involved in work that they weren’t trained or competent in. This is likely a reference to Coomara, whom Gill and Lamba both sued in 2022.
6. Gill has open $7,000,000 defamation suit with Amir Attaran
Gill plays the pity card throughout her interview, lamenting the fact that she doesn’t have money to pay the existing cost order. She leaves out that she has an open $7,000,000 defamation suit against Amir Attaran and the University of Ottawa. His crime? Calling her an idiot on Twitter.
This plea from Gill rings hollow. She laments that she’s facing bankruptcy, yet she is still attempting to bankrupt someone else for comments made on Twitter. One would think that she would drop that suit, at a minimum.
If Gill was being transparent, she would have disclosed this.
7. Gill sued people who had apologized to her publicly
[73] On multiple occasions, Dr. Maciver has apologized to the Plaintiffs both publicly and privately and shown contrition for the heated language he used on Twitter. The fact of Dr. Maciver’s apologies was also made known within the physician community on Twitter.
Likely the worst of the comments came from Angus Maciver, who had publicly apologized for making them. But it wasn’t enough to stop him from getting sued. This comes across as particularly vindictive
Would anyone donate to Gill’s GiveSendGo account if she had disclosed all of this?
Probably not.
To be clear, Gill has every right to express her views and opinions in the public arena. She can put forward whatever she believes to be true. Likewise, she has the ability to post downright dumb and offensive things. This is called “free speech”, and it’s something everyone in the “Freedom Movement” should agree on.
But it’s become clear that she cares about her free speech, and only her free speech. Yes, she should be able to post what she wants.
It’s just too bad that she doesn’t extend her victims the same courtesy.
Maybe, just maybe, she shouldn’t have filed such an absurd lawsuit in 2020. Perhaps she shouldn’t have named so many people. Would it be too hard to admit she was wrong?
Note: by checking this link, anyone can SEARCH ONLINE FOR FREE to see what’s happening with various cases. Don’t accept the word of anyone here, but check it out for yourselves. Call the Court, or visit in person if that’s a feasible option.
KULVINDER GILL BEGGING FOR MONEY:
(1) https://www.givesendgo.com/kulvinder
(2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v_La5W3PP4
(3) https://www.ontario.ca/page/search-court-cases-online
VARIOUS COURT DECISIONS:
(1) Gill v. Maciver, 2022 ONSC 1279 Case dismissed under anti-SLAPP laws
(2) Gill v. Maciver, 2022 ONSC 6169 – Over $1 million in costs awarded
(3) Gill v. MacIver, 2023 ONCA 776 – Security for costs from The Pointer Group
(4) Gill v. Maciver, 2024 ONCA 126 – Appeal dismissed
AFFIDAVITS FROM CSASPP CASE:
(1) CSASPP RG Kuntz Affidavit
(2) CSASPP RG Gaw Affidavit
(3) CSASPP RG Sable Affidavit
GILL PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE CLAIM:
(1) Gill Notice of Action
LAMBA PROFESSIONAL MALPRACTICE CLAIM:
(1) Lamba Statement Of Claim
(2) Lamba Notice Of Intent To Defend
GILL/ATTARAN $7,000,000 DEFAMATION LAWSUIT:
(1) Gill-Attaran Statement Of Claim
(2) Gill Attaran Affidavit Of Service
(3) Gill-Attaran Notice Of Intent
(4) Gill-Attaran Counsel Abandons Plaintiff