Man ordered to pay $20K in damages for sharing woman’s intimate images without consent

In this March 13, 2019, file photo Facebook, Messenger and Instagram apps are are displayed on an iPhone in New York. (AP Photo / Jenny Kane, File)

A B.C. man who repeatedly posted videos he took of a “near stranger” to social media has been ordered to pay $20,000 in damages for sharing the woman’s intimate images without her consent, according to a recent decision.

The Civil Resolution Tribunal published its decision on the claim Friday, briefly describing the content of the videos Sherif Elbishlawi posted to Instagram and Facebook. The woman’s identity is subject to a publication ban.

Elbishlawi met the woman outside of a club, and she agreed that he could “lift her” while his friend filmed it, according to the decision.

“During the videos, the (woman’s) skirt is moved and lifted in such a way that her underwear is exposed, and her buttocks are partially exposed,” tribunal member Maria Montgomery wrote. “One of the videos also captures up the applicant’s skirt.”

The decision also noted the woman was identifiable in the videos.

Elbishlawi argued the videos were not intimate images but the tribunal found they met the criteria set out in provincial legislation, which defines an intimate image as one in which someone is “nude or nearly nude, engaging in a sexual act, or with visible genital organs, anal region, or breasts.”

The tribunal also rejected Elbishlawi’s argument that the woman had consented to the creation and sharing of the videos, in part, because Meta had “twice removed” the videos from its platforms and deactivated Elbishlawi’s accounts.

‘Widely accessible’ videos

The woman told the tribunal Elbishlawi’s accounts had tens of thousands of followers, which was not disputed.

“I find that the videos were widely accessible, potentially to the applicant’s acquaintances, which goes to the harmful nature of the sharing,” Montgomery’s decision said.

When assessing damages to award as compensation for pain and suffering, Montgonery noted the claim was different than most that come before the tribunal, which involve “more sexually explicit images” as well as “former intimate partners who weaponize intimate images as a form of intimate partner violence.”

The motivation in this case, according to Montgomery, was distinct from those cases.

“It appears the respondent used the videos to gain social media exposure,” the decision said, adding that “the videos were potentially used to generate revenue.”

The tribunal found the claim warranted damages of $10,000 for pain and suffering on account of how widely accessible the videos were and the impact on the woman—who said she was humiliated when the videos were shared and remained anxious afterward because of the fear they would be posted online again.

‘Deserving of rebuke’

The tribunal also awarded $5,000 in aggravated damages on account of Elbishlawi’s conduct.

“In response to the (woman’s) requests to not post the videos, (Elbishlawi) either ignored those requests or insisted on meeting (the woman) in person first because, as he stated, ‘I don’t do favors for strangers.’ (Elbishlawi) has not apologized and maintains that he committed no wrongdoing,” Montgomery wrote, adding that this “likely exacerbated the harm the applicant experienced.”

The possibility that Elbishlawi made money off the videos was cited as one reason for awarding an additional $5,000 in punitive damages, as was his refusal to remove the videos and his reposting of the videos after they were removed by Meta.

“I am satisfied that the respondent’s conduct is deserving of rebuke and markedly departs from ordinary standards of decent behaviour,” Montgomery wrote.

Previously, the tribunal was only able to award a maximum of $5,000 in damages in intimate images cases. Earlier this year, the ceiling was raised to $75,000.