Distributed in 2023, the sticker was wrongly attributed to the organization the student was part of
A sticker that read “I [heart] HAMAS,” bore the logo of the University of British Columbia’s Social Justice Centre, and was distributed across campus and social media did not defame a student who worked at the centre, the British Columbia Court of Appeal has ruled, upholding a lower court’s finding that the sticker did not specifically refer to the student and therefore did not tarnish his reputation.
The sticker was created and distributed in November 2023 by an employee of the Hillel BC Society, an organization promoting Jewish life at UBC. The sticker was wrongly attributed to the SCJ, which engages in research and outreach on social justice issues, because it bore the organization’s logo, sparking backlash on social media and prompting calls for the student SCJ members to be expelled, deported, charged, and victimized.
Hillel called the sticker offensive, said it did not align with its values, and fired the employee, Adam Dobrer, shortly after. However, the SCJ and Matthew Cheesman, a member of the organization whose work focused on Palestinian solidarity, sued both Dobrer and Hillel, claiming the sticker was defamatory.
SCJ withdrew from the proceedings in 2024 because its status as an unincorporated association prevented it from maintaining a defamation lawsuit. In July 2025, the BC Supreme Court dismissed Cheesman’s action, ruling that while the sticker was defamatory, it did not specifically refer to Cheesman and therefore did not defame him.
Cheesman appealed the ruling, arguing that the lower court had made two errors in tossing out his lawsuit. According to Cheesman, the lower court made a legal error when determining whether the sticker aligned him with Hamas, because the court assessed the situation from the perspective of an abstract, reasonable person. Cheesman argued that the court should have instead assessed the situation from the perspective of a reasonable person who knew him.
He also alleged that the lower court erred in assessing his defamation claim under the criteria required by Quebec civil law.
Dobrer, meanwhile, filed a cross-appeal, arguing that the BC Supreme Court should have ordered costs to be awarded in his favour. The lower court had instead told the parties to pay their own litigation fees.
In a unanimous ruling on Monday, the BCCA tossed out both the appeal and cross appeal.
Addressing Cheesman’s allegations that the BC Supreme Court made multiple legal errors, the BCCA said that, read as a whole, the lower court’s reasoning demonstrated that it understood the law and applied it correctly to the case.
Regarding Dobrer’s cross appeal, the BCCA said it was not satisfied that he had identified any legal errors in the lower court’s reasoning that would justify interfering with its costs ruling.
Counsel for Dobrer and the Hillel BC Society declined to comment on the decision. Counsel for Cheesman did not respond to a request for comment.
