Some people say that one person can’t make a difference. Well, this is an example of how untrue that statement is. One person can make a difference. This one person is so discriminatory, hateful and abusive towards a specific community of beautiful people that he has created the most glorious legal decisions that will help pave the way for the equity, free speech in the right for advocacy and the respect that the 2SLGBTQ+ community deserve.
We can’t forget about his famous Supreme Court of Canada and the decision that allows marginalized communities to stand up for themselves in the name of advocacy without facing defamation lawsuits.
It takes very brave people to stand up and fight. The famous quote “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”. Well. Everyone decided to do something. And having the perseverance, and determination to willingly go into lengthy litigation battles is never easy.
However, clearly, we have good people in this world who will not stand around and allow this type of behavior to be acceptable. And because of that, we have now this incredible history that is already been cited in hundreds of other legal cases. The gift that keeps giving.
Supreme Court of Canada
Hansman v. Neufeld, 2023 SCC 14 (CanLII), [2023] 1 SCR 519
Glen Hansman v. Barry Neufeld, 2022 CanLII 693 (SCC)
Supreme Court of Canada
British Columbia Teachers’ Association v Neufeld, 2023 BCSC 1460
Hansman
Neufeld v. Hansman, 2021 BCCA 222
Neufeld v Hansman, 2019 BCSC 2028
Lang
Lang v Neufeld, 2022 BCSC 693
Lang v Neufeld, 2021 BCSC 1468
Lang v Neufeld, 2022 BCSC 130
Bondar
Bondar v Neufeld, 2024 BCSC 594
Neufeld v. Bondar, 2025 BCCA 51
Bondar v Neufeld, 2023 BCSC 2496
BC Human Rights Tribunal
Chilliwack Teachers’ Association v. Neufeld (No. 11), 2026 BCHRT 50 – Costs
Chilliwack Teachers’ Association v. Neufeld (No. 10), 2026 BCHRT 49 – Final Decision
Chilliwack Teachers’ Association v. Neufeld (No.9), 2025 BCHRT 310
Chilliwack Teachers’ Association v. Neufeld (No. 8), 2025 BCHRT 64
Chilliwack Teachers’ Association v. Neufeld (No. 7), 2025 BCHRT 34
Chilliwack Teachers’ Association v. Neufeld (No. 6), 2024 BCHRT 337
Chilliwack Teachers’ Association v. Neufeld (No. 5), 2024 BCHRT 332
Chilliwack Teachers’ Association v. Neufeld (No. 4), 2024 BCHRT 284
Chilliwack Teachers’ Association v. Neufeld (No.3), 2024 BCHRT 232
Chilliwack Teachers’ Association v. Neufeld (No. 2), 2024 BCHRT 180
Chilliwack Teachers’ Association v. Neufeld, 2021 BCHRT 6
Payments – From Judgements
BC HRT (Decision 11) – $10,000
BH HRT (Decision 10) – $442.00 + $750,000 + interest
Cain Bondar – $35,000 + $10,000
Total = $805,422.00
Media
Commissioner welcomes decision protecting LGBTQ people from hate speech
$750,000: B.C. Human Rights Tribunal orders payout in ruling against former school trustee
Former Chilliwack school trustee Barry Neufeld ordered to pay $750K for violating Human Rights Code
Former B.C. school trustee ordered to pay $750K in discrimination, hate speech complaint
BCTF celebrates huge win for trans rights and school inclusivity at BC Human Rights Tribunal
The Right to React to Harmful Speech: SCC dismisses a defamation action using anti-SLAPP law, highlighting the public interest in protecting counter-speech
BC Commissioner Intervening BCTF v. Neufeld
Hansman v Neufled [2022] – West Coast Leaf
Some examples of paragraphs from his decisions
Chilliwack Teachers’ Association v. Neufeld (No. 10), 2026 BCHRT 49 – Final Decision
[305] We have also found that Mr. Neufeld exposed the Class to hatred or contempt, and published materials indicating discrimination against them. In doing so, Mr. Neufeld exposed the members of the Class to repeated messages that their very existence was a threat to children, families, and social order. He invoked the most insidious discriminatory stereotypes and tropes to denigrate their efforts to create an education environment that is inclusive for 2SLGBTQIA+ students. He used his power and public platform to call for their erasure in the public school system that they dedicate their working lives to. He described their lives and their loved ones in language that was dehumanizing, delegitimizing, and sought to strip them of their inherent dignity. These harms of hate and discriminatory speech are extremely serious and damaging: Oger (No. 7) at para. 226.
Chilliwack Teachers’ Association v. Neufeld (No. 11), 2026 BCHRT 50
[2] Throughout the complaint, Mr. Neufeld has repeatedly and flagrantly demonstrated his disregard for the Human Rights Tribunal and its process. He has deliberately violated the Tribunal’s Rules and orders, undermining the fair and efficient processing of the complaint. His conduct has caused the CTA and the Tribunal to divert resources away from a resolution of the complaint on its merits, towards policing and correcting behaviour which Mr. Neufeld knew or ought to have known was wrong. In our view, this conduct warrants rebuke. We order Mr. Neufeld to pay CTA $10,000 in costs.
Chilliwack Teachers’ Association v. Neufeld (No. 8), 2025 BCHRT 64
[7] In an August 2024 interview posted online, Mr. Neufeld divulged the following:
But then in February of this year they said ‘Hey Barry, the Chilliwack Teachers’ Association want to make a deal out of court.’ And I said ‘well, what do they want?’ And they said ‘they just want you to apologize for your opinions. They want you to take a sensitivity training so you can understand what transgender is all about. They want you to promise never to run for public office in BC again. And they want you to donate $50,000 to an LGBT charity.’ And I said ‘okay I’ll think about it.’
.…
So I politely told them – I said ‘no, I won’t apologize. They won’t give me any names of who I’m apologizing to. I’m not going to take any Marxist puppy-dog training because I’ve studied this issue for six years. I know both sides of the argument, backwards and forwards. And they have no right to tell me I can’t run for public office. And finally, even if the money’s not mine’ – see my lawyers had told me that if there’s a penalty, my indemnity insurance would cover it – even if the money’s not mine, I don’t want it to go to an organization that damages children.’
So, that was that. And they said, ‘well that’s pretty stupid. You’re going to be found guilty of hate speech.’ And I said ‘well at my age, I don’t really care.’ So, within a couple of days I got a call from the insurance company and they said ‘you turned down a very reasonable settlement offer, we’re not going to cover your expenses anymore, you’re on your own.’
… So that was in February…just this past February. So I started casting about, looking for a new lawyer. And well my government lawyer says ‘we’ll defend you but you’re going to lose anyways. But we need a retainer of $150,000.’
… And then there was another um pro bono law firm and they said I should’ve taken the deal, because I’m going to lose.
