Guergis launches lawsuit against Harper

Former MP sues Prime Minister Harper, the Conservative Party of Canada, and several individuals


Former Conservative MP Helena Guergis has launched a court action in Ontario’s Superior Court of Justice, suing Prime Minister Stephen Harper and several others for defamation, conspiracy, intentional infliction of mental suffering and negligence. According to a statement of claim obtained by CBC, Guergis’s suit seeks general damages of $800,000 plus punitive damages of $250,000 and aggravated damages of $250,000. Guergis had to leave the Conservative caucus in April of 2010 following allegations against her and her husband, former MP Rahim Jaffer. Guergis was not charged and was cleared by the RCMP. A spokesperson for the Prime Minister’s Office called Guergis’s claim “groundless.”


Filed under:

Guergis launches lawsuit against Harper

  1. Oh this woman doesn’t learn!  Move on and be happy Helena!

  2. Hello, silly season!  This is kinda ridiculous, and she’s probably just looking for a settlement to help pay for Rahim Jaffer’s, erm, proclivities.  Nonetheless, I found this reaction equally silly:
    PMO spokesthingy:  “The voters have made their minds up on Helena Guergis.”  I fail to see how this is actually a defence against the specific charges Guergis is making.  I think the spokesthingy that uttered this is stuck on some sort of ‘generic defence of attacks against Conservatives’ tape loop.  The spokesthingy is probably a poor man’s Watson.


  3. How would you feel if you were slandered in public and in parliament, and driven out of your job and career by false accusations and groundless rumours?   I think many people would sue in those circumstances.   It is not about her husband, her personality, or her politics – it is about truly horrific treatment that would not be legal or tolerable in any other workplace, so why do people think it’s OK just because she was a politician?  How she was treated is not OK.   I hope they come to a fair out of court settlement with her and that includes a public apology from those involved.

    • The Ethics Commissioner already ruled in July that Guergis broke rules while an MP by soliciting on behalf of one of her husband’s businesses.  She repeatedly damaged her own reputation by freaking out at the Halifax airport and then by having her aide call in anonymously to a radio show and give her raving reviews.   The absolute defence in any slander suit is that you have told the truth.  Ms. Guergis will have a hard time proving that any rumors were “groundless’ or that accusations were “false”.    She is definitely looking for an out of court settlement.  She is hoping that the lawyers will throw her some money just to make this go away. 

      • But the allegations she’s referring to weren’t anything to do with any of that. Remember Mr. Harper sic’d the RCMP on her and implied she’d done things that were criminal — specifically when he was defending Devinder Shory and the accusation of his committing $70 million dollars worth of mortgage fraud against BMO.

        • The question is then what led Harper to believe Guergis might be guilty of criminal activity.   If he honestly believed she might be guilty and he asked the RCMP to investigate, I am not sure that she will be successful in a lawsuit especially if it was found she was guilty of other “questionable” practices that made the suspicions warranted.  I guess we will find that out.

          • He never explained to her what her “crimes” were.  Never answered.

          • If you read the source CBC document, she says the crimes were drugs, prostitution, etc.  Hence, the lawsuit for defamation.

    • “…..it is about truly horrific treatment that would not be legal or tolerable in any other workplace,”

      It happens thousands of times a day in ‘any other’ workplace. 

    • If can think back far enough, it was the opposition parties and the media screaming for her head,,the constant talk of cocaine and busty hookers. When Harper finally let her go, those same people started asking why he did it…suddenly there was sympathy replacing the mockery.

  4. She’s been a bad bad BAD girl. Harper should put her across his knee and spank spank SPANK just like all little spoiled brats should be. 

    Guerges should quit making those ugly faces her distorted horrible face might freeze like that. It’s bad enuff she is stuck with horrible looks don’t make it any worse.

    Did you ever see a set of more evil eyes than hers.

  5. Where there’s smoke there’s fire. That girl is on fire. She loses every where. 
    The posts are 95% against her can it get worse?

    Yes it can when she tries to drag other people through the mud in court and finds out she is the one that is covered in horse manure. 

    Can you get the smell yet? 

  6. Go, Guergis, Go!!!

    Maybe she can use this opportunity to show how Harper’s career, beginning with his scandalous rise to power with the assistance of Peter McKay ruined Canada’s chance to have a real leader…David Orchard (from WIki):

    2003 Progressive Conservative leadership campaign

    Respect for Orchard grew in the Red Tory wing of the PC Party: roughly one-quarter of the party membership supported him during the 2003 PC leadership campaign, including Joe Clark’s wife, Maureen McTeer[2] Orchard ultimately came in third on the third ballot in the 2003 PC convention, behind Nova Scotia Member of Parliament (MP) Peter MacKay and Calgary lawyer Jim Prentice. Orchard decided to support Peter MacKay over Jim Prentice due to the latter’s implicit support for a United Alternative (merger of the party with the Canadian Alliance (CA) party). However, Orchard’s support, which helped Peter MacKay win the leadership, came at price. MacKay signed a written deal, or “gentleman’s agreement” to seal support from Orchard’s largely loyal delegates on the final ballot.

    The MacKay-Orchard deal

    The deal promised a review of the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, no joint candidates with the Canadian Alliance, and a promise to redouble efforts to rebuild the national status of the Progressive Conservative Party. The agreement also included reexamining the PC Party’s policies on government subsidies for national railways and preserving the environment. This agreement was controversial, and some time passed before it was released to the public. Many in the PC Party approved of the deal, including leadership candidate Scott Brison.

    At first MacKay had seemed to be willing to adhere to the deal. In July, MacKay struck up a “Blue Ribbon PC Policy Review Panel”, chaired by Tory MP Bill Casey, in order to reexamine the party’s policies on NAFTA. But MacKay soon violated the deal by encouraging talks between high-profile members of the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservatives. In October 2003, the talks culminated in federal conservative leaders Peter MacKay and Stephen Harper signing an agreement in principle to merge the Progressive Conservatives and the Canadian Alliance to form the new Conservative Party of Canada.
    That’s how we got stuck with Stephen Harper and his shit leadership. Wish her well with her case.

Sign in to comment.