Niemela v. Malamas [7] Page 4 Mr. Niemela has commenced two actions in an effort to protect his reputation (i) Vancouver Registry No. S146067 commenced August 2014 against his former client, Strato Malamas, and a host of John Doe defendants (the “Malamas Action”). In that action Google is not named as a defendant. The claims are for defamation, injurious falsehood, inducing breach of contract, intentional interference with economic relations, harassment, conspiracy, and breach of privacy; (ii) Vancouver Registry No. S149103 commenced November 2014 against Google (the “Google Action”). The primary claim in this action is against Google for publishing snippets containing defamatory material on its search pages, and for publishing the hyperlinks to websites containing the defamatory postings. The Google Action also makes claims for injurious falsehood and breach of privacy. [8] Mr. Niemela has obtained two unopposed orders in the Malamas Action requiring those defendants to remove the content of 146 URLs which link to the three offending posts. These orders were not made against Google but Google has voluntarily agreed to remove the 146 URLs from search results on google.ca. Mr. Niemela did not apply for orders against the operators of Ripoffreport and Reviewstalk. Mr. Niemela explained this omission: he has no way of determining precisely where those website operators are located and has no realistic prospect of enforcing an order against them. ISSUES [9] As noted earlier, there are two applications before the Court: 1. Mr. Niemela’s application for a mandatory injunction against Google in the Malamas Action to compel Google to block search results for 146 websites worldwide; and 2015 BCSC 1024 (CanLII) and recover the losses he says he has suffered because of the defamatory postings: