Quebec law helps victims of non-consensual intimate image sharing remove photos
A Quebec law is coming into force, giving people new tools to obtain a court order to remove intimate images posted online.
Under the Criminal Code, publishing, texting or sharing intimate images of someone without their consent is a crime.
But for most victims, this does not always mean unlawfully shared images will get removed quickly.
The new Quebec law allows victims to fill out a form online or at a courthouse and obtain an order from a judge requiring the images or footage to be removed.
Failure to comply comes with stiff penalties — with fines up to $50,000 per day for a first offence or 18 months in jail.
Quebec is the second province after British Columbia to pass legislation protecting victims of non-consensual image sharing.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
25 minutes ago
- CTV News
Man found sitting along Hwy. 417 taken to hospital, Ottawa OPP looking for his family
Police are asking the family of a man who was found sitting along Highway 417 in Ottawa to come forward. (OPP/ X) The Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) is asking the family of a man who was found sitting along Highway 417 in Ottawa on Friday to come forward. He was found sitting along the highway westbound, near the March and Eagleson roads exit. Police say the man was taken to hospital as he 'may have experienced some form of medical episode.' Officers add that no identification was found on him, noting that he was not able to communicate with them. They add that there are no missing person reports matching his description. He is described as approximately 50-year-old. At the time he was found he was wearing blue jeans, a black t-shirt and a dark grey sweater with black/red shoes. 'We urgently want to locate this man's family or other caregiver,' the OPP said in a post on X. Anyone with information is asked to call police at 1-888-310-1122 and refer to incident E250796322.
CTV News
25 minutes ago
- CTV News
Liberals, Conservatives pass major projects legislation in House of Commons
Prime Minister Mark Carney speaks at a press conference on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, on Thursday, June 19, 2025. THE CANADIAN PRESS/ Patrick Doyle Conservative members of Parliament voted with the minority Liberal government to pass its marquee major projects legislation Friday evening, setting it up to become law before Canada Day. The legislation, also known as the one Canadian economy act, would allow the government to green-light a list of projects that have been deemed to be in the national interest, fast-tracking their approvals. The Liberals have called it the core of the government's domestic economic response to U.S. tariffs. 'This is what makes us different from the United States, this is what makes us more independent from the United States, this is what's going to move us forward,' Prime Minister Mark Carney said at a press conference after the vote, adding the legislation needed to pass quickly 'because we are in a crisis.' 'And if you don't think we're in a crisis, go to Sault Ste. Marie, go to Hamilton, go to Windsor.' After the second of two votes in the House of Commons on Friday, Carney crossed the floor to shake hands with Opposition House leader Andrew Scheer and Conservative deputy leader Melissa Lantsman. Two votes were held instead of one after the House Speaker ruled that the legislation had two distinct parts without a clear common element. That allowed the Bloc Quebecois and NDP members to vote in favour of the first part of the bill -- which looks to tackle internal trade barriers -- and against the more controversial second part dealing with major projects. The major projects bill grants the government sweeping powers to quickly approve projects that are deemed to be in the national interest. Provincial and territorial premiers have given Carney lists of projects they want to see approved, but no national list of projects has been made public so far. 'We all agree that more fulsome conversations are needed to select the nation-building projects and to determine the conditions that they must fulfil. In other words, the real work begins now,' Carney said. The legislation has drawn criticism from Indigenous leaders and environmental groups who say it gives too much power to the federal cabinet to bypass existing laws. The legislation was introduced on June 6 and was pushed through the House after about eight hours of committee study on Tuesday and Wednesday. The House transport committee did amend the bill to, among other things, remove the Indian Act from a list of laws the government can sidestep when determining whether a project should move forward. First Nations leaders have warned the bill could violate their constitutionally protected rights and may lead to legal challenges. Carney emphasized the need to respect the constitutional rights of Indigenous Peoples in his press conference on Friday. 'The major projects office will have an Indigenous advisory council whose core function will be to honour Section 35 rights in the implementation of this bill,' he said. He promised to hold full-day summits with First Nations, Inuit and Metis rights-holders and leaders in the coming weeks, alongside Crown-Indigenous Relations Minister Rebecca Alty and Indigenous Services Minister Mandy Gull-Masty. 'Consultation, co-operation, engagement and participation are at the heart of this bill,' he said. The bill is now headed to the Senate, which is scheduled to sit until June 27. By Sarah Ritchie. With files from Kyle Duggan and Alessia Passafiume.
CTV News
27 minutes ago
- CTV News
B.C. Realtor's licence cancelled over ‘deceptive and underhanded' conduct
Real estate sale signage is shown on a street in Oakville, Ont., west of Toronto, on Thursday, Nov.7, 2024. (Richard Buchan / The Canadian Press) A B.C. Realtor who lost a court case against a former client earlier this year has now had his licence cancelled by the provincial real estate regulator. Alan Hu and his Personal Real Estate Corporation recently entered a consent order agreement with the B.C. Financial Services Authority, in which they agreed to pay a $120,000 fine and have their licences cancelled. The penalties stem from the same incident that led to a court decision against Hu in January, in which B.C. Supreme Court Justice Amy D. Francis found Hu had 'intentionally undermined' his client Pei Hua Zhong by purchasing for himself the Surrey home that Zhong had made an offer to buy. Francis' decision in the case describes Hu's conduct as 'deceptive and underhanded' – a description that is repeated in the consent order document published on the BCFSA website Friday. What happened The court case revolved around Zhong's attempts to purchase a property on 174 Street near 20 Avenue in Surrey. The one-acre parcel had an assessed value of just over $3 million for 2025, according to BC Assessment. 174 Street property in South Surrey The property at the centre of the lawsuit is seen in this 2011 photo from BC Assessment. ( Zhong met Hu in November 2017 and hired the Realtor to facilitate both the sale of his home on Poplar Drive and the purchase of a new home, according to the court decision. Through Hu, Zhong made two offers to purchase the 174 Street property. The first, for $2.1 million, was accepted, but expired when Zhong was unable to sell his home in time to raise the necessary funds for the down payment. While the first offer was expiring in late December 2017, Hu was in Las Vegas with his wife and another couple – Lingxia Tao and her husband Zhi Chen. According to the decision, what exactly was discussed between the parties in Las Vegas was disputed during the court proceedings, but the end result was that Tao made an offer on the 174 Street property for slightly less than $2.1 million, which was accepted, while Zhong made a new offer of $2.05 million, which was rejected. Two weeks later, Tao assigned her contract to purchase the property to Hu, who ultimately completed the transaction. Hu later sold the property in September 2021 for $3.35 million – a profit of more than $1.2 million over what he had paid when he assumed Tao's contract less than four years earlier. Francis ruled in Zhong's favour, ordering Hu to 'disgorge' his portion of the profits, a number that remained unspecified in the court decision because of ongoing litigation between Hu and Tao over their purported agreement to invest in real estate together. Regulator-imposed consequences The BCFSA consent order details these same circumstances, albeit with the names of the other parties and the address of the property redacted. According to the document, Hu's client (Zhong) learned that Hu was the owner of the property when he performed a title search in September 2021. Zhong filed his civil lawsuit in January 2022. In April of that year, he submitted a complaint to the BCFSA, the consent order indicates. The document notes that Hu made false statements to BCFSA investigators about his agreement with Tao and falsely claimed that he had offered Zhong the opportunity to take the assignment of the contract to buy the 174 Street property. He later admitted during the trial that he had never told Zhong about the assignment. Hu also failed to notify the BCFSA when the B.C. Supreme Court judgment against him was issued earlier this year, according to the consent order. In the agreement, Hu admits to a lengthy list of conduct unbecoming of a licensee and professional misconduct, including: Failing to act honestly in providing real estate services Failing to disclose 'all known material information' to a client Failing to maintain the client's confidentiality Failing to act in the best interests of the client Failing to take reasonable steps to avoid a conflict of interest Failing to promptly and fully disclose a conflict of interest to a client Providing trading services outside of the brokerage with which he and his PREC were licensed Collecting funds in relation to the purchase of a property without promptly remitting the money to his brokerage Failing to keep the brokerage's managing broker informed of the assignment contract Failing to promptly notify the BCFSA of the court judgment Failing or refusing to co-operate with an investigation And making false or misleading statements in relation to an investigation Hu and his company admitted this misconduct and agreed to the cancellation of their licences. They are jointly required to pay the $120,000 fine within six months of signing the consent order agreement. 'Real estate licensees have an enshrined duty to act in the best interests of their client, and Hu's actions ran wholly contrary to that duty,' said Jon Vandall, the BCFSA's senior vice-president of compliance and enforcement, in a news release issued Friday. 'Hu undermined his own client for personal gain and demonstrated a clear disregard for the established ethical expectations for licensees. The significant penalty issued to Hu, including the outright cancellation of his real estate licence, reflects the severity of Hu's actions.'
