Articles 2023

Today
Today
Intrusion Upon Seclusion: The Story of an Unsavory Camera in the Boudoir

Intrusion Upon Seclusion: The Story of an Unsavory Camera in the Boudoir

  • January 23, 2017
  • Roland Hung and Lucas Versteegh

in December 2016, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice released Patel v. Sheth, the next in a series of cases sprouting from the 2012 recognition of a tort of intrusion upon seclusion. While Patel is deeply planted in a messy matrimonial context the analysis and finding of an invasion of privacy is worth addressing from a business risk perspective as well.

Privacy Law
LSUC Privacy Designation - Call for Working Group Members

LSUC Privacy Designation - Call for Working Group Members

  • December 23, 2016
  • Molly M. Reynolds

The OBA Privacy and Access to Information section has struck a working group to explore the creation of a LSUC Certified Specialist Program in privacy and access to information law. The executive invites section members to join and participate in the working group.

Privacy Law
CASL’s First Compliance and Enforcement Decision: Lessons learned

CASL’s First Compliance and Enforcement Decision: Lessons learned

  • November 04, 2016
  • Roland Hung and Jeremy Lin

The first Compliance and Enforcement Decision under Canada’s Anti-Spam Law was issued on October 27, 2016. Among other insights, the decision provides clarification on the "conspicuous publication" ground of implied consent to receive commercial electronic messages and the application of the factors relevant to the quantum of an administrative monetary penalty under CASL.

Privacy Law
Deletion of Browser History in Failed Attempt to Protect Privacy Not Spoliation of Evidence

Deletion of Browser History in Failed Attempt to Protect Privacy Not Spoliation of Evidence

  • October 27, 2016
  • Sean Bawden

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice recently dismissed a claim for spoliation of evidence resulting from the efforts of an employee of the defendant company to delete the browsing history on his computer before turning it over in compliance with a court order. Although the Court accepted that the employee did not intentionally destroy evidence relevant to the case, the decision is a reminder of the boundaries of employee expectations of privacy.

Privacy Law
Lessons from the Home Depot Privacy Class Action Settlement

Lessons from the Home Depot Privacy Class Action Settlement

  • October 25, 2016
  • Roland Hung and Natasha Chin

The decision in Lozanski v The Home Depot, Inc. by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice is one of the few court-approved privacy breach class action settlements in Canada. The decision provides some much needed guidance in this area: the Court suggests that actual harm is needed for class members to receive financial compensation and that companies should adopt a proactive approach to mitigate liability when faced with a privacy breach.

Privacy Law
Context Relevant to Risk of Harm Analysis Under FIPPA, says Divisional Court

Context Relevant to Risk of Harm Analysis Under FIPPA, says Divisional Court

  • October 13, 2016
  • Avi Sharabi

In a recent decision, the Divisional Court set aside an order of the IPC mandating that certain confidential information of the applicant union was to be disclosed to a representative of a rival union. The Court held that the applicants need not show that harm had actually occurred, but that the context of the disclosure request was enough to demonstrate a reasonable risk of harm.

Privacy Law
Does PIPEDA Apply to Condominiums?

Does PIPEDA Apply to Condominiums?

  • June 23, 2016
  • Rodrigue Escayola

This article discusses why, in the author's view, PIPEDA does not apply to condominium corporations.

Privacy Law